Simsbury

[n1chu]

I see there is a notice to the general membership of the Simsbury FD. The intent of the notice is to make all aware of a new radio system for the town’s PD, DPW, Highway, Board of Ed and Ambulance. The FD has their own comms system which also uses the same UHF Band and they share tower sites, (including connection capabilities) with the current town system. This sharing will continue without affecting the FD’s current system.
The intent is to inform the FD that because of the upgrade any monitoring of the PD, ambulance or other town depts will probably require newer scanners (apparently the scanners presently used are a few generations old) capable of receiving the new P25 mode the Town is moving to…

“From: Kevin Kowalski <KKowalski@simsburyfd.org>
Date: November 30, 2021 at 16:08:24 EST
To: SFD-ALL <sfd-all@simsburyfd.org>
Subject: PD radio operations


I wanted to alert everyone out there that The town PD,DPW Highway , Board of ED and Ambulance will be getting a new Radio system. They will be working on our towers and the system should work just like ours as a simulcasting transmitter. They have been working on the install of the new equipment over the last several months and will continue to the first of the year when they should turn it on.. It will be in phases.”

The BCD996P2 was suggested as an acceptable replacement for monitoring the town’s new system. The UHF Band with the existing frequencies will still be in play, just the change to a P25 digital mode.

Corrections appreciated. I consider it to be credible due to the excerpt of the notice I have included above sent to all members of the FD.

 

[SVFD440]

How did you get that email?

 

[bondo_06092]

I guess I would ask why you think it's appropriate to post an internal email including the addresses of their members when you could just post the info? Is there a point to that?

 

[KevinC]

Let's keep this in mind please...

Posting company or priviledged information on these forums

Everyone, I wanted to bring one of our rules/guidelines to light because it seems some members are forgetting this fact. That fact is that there is a high possibility that your employer may be reading your posts on this forum. Some may not care and some will. Often in the radio communications...

forums.radioreference.com

 

[SVFD440]

Let's keep this in mind please...

Posting company or priviledged information on these forums

Everyone, I wanted to bring one of our rules/guidelines to light because it seems some members are forgetting this fact. That fact is that there is a high possibility that your employer may be reading your posts on this forum. Some may not care and some will. Often in the radio communications...

forums.radioreference.com

So no action from an admin for someone who posts a message form a group they have no affiliation with? Or with direct email addresses for members of that organization?

 

[KevinC]

So no action from an admin for someone who posts a message form a group they have no affiliation with? Or with direct email addresses for members of that organization?

I'm not an admin I'm a moderator, but I have no way of knowing if the OP had/has permission to post this or not or is/isn't affiliated with that agency. If you are concerned I'd suggest contacting that agency and find out, then they can take it up with the person that posted it.

 

[n1chu]

I guess I would ask why you think it's appropriate to post an internal email including the addresses of their members when you could just post the info? Is there a point to that?

The originator was also looking for the best price for scanners that could replace the FD’s outmoded scanners and asked to be notified should a better price (than the Amazon price he had posted) be known. I neglected to include that part of the email because it did not relate to my intent only to post the fact that the system was changing. I guess that knowledge allowed me to believe there was an expectation the address of the author be included, that he hoped to be contacted should someone know of a better price. I also saw no need for concern as the subject of the post was/is is a matter of public record. As for it being what you consider an internal email, there is no such thing when it belongs to a public or quasi-public entity. But thank you for pointing out the discrepancy in the manner in which I posted. It brought to light the omission and allowed me to correct my post to the forum.

 

[n1chu]

I'm not an admin I'm a moderator, but I have no way of knowing if the OP had/has permission to post this or not or is/isn't affiliated with that agency. If you are concerned I'd suggest contacting that agency and find out, then they can take it up with the person that posted it.

You assume there is no affiliation. That is incorrect. It is of no concern.

 

[KevinC]

You assume there is no affiliation. That is incorrect. It is of no concern.

Wrong. I assumed nothing. Others may have, but I absolutely didn't. Try harder next time.

 

[n1chu]

Wrong. I assumed nothing. Others may have, but I absolutely didn't. Try harder next time.

KevinC, Apologies, my comment was directed at SVFD440… not you. I mistakenly replied under the wrong heading.

 

[gn32772]

Sounds like they will not be on CLMRN, since he said they will be staying on UHF. As far as i know CLMRN is only 700/800.

 

[n1chu]

No mention of CLMRN was mentioned for Simsbury, just a change to P25 digital. And as you state, UHF is not supported on CLMRN.

Avon did consider CLMRN but my guess was the coverage wasn’t there for the southwest/west side of town. They are pursuing other options…

 

[nhfdcadet]

still cheaper to add a CLMRN site for coverage than to replace a whole system. I'm surprised more towns don't go that route.

 

[SVFD440]

No it was far cheaper for Simsbury to stay UHF then to go to CLMRN

 

[n1chu]

still cheaper to add a CLMRN site for coverage than to replace a whole system. I'm surprised more towns don't go that route.

It’s my understanding that CLMRN requires the interested party bring their own FCC allocated frequencies to the party? …don’t know if that’s a monumental problem or not…

 

[awasser1]

Simsbury comes in awful now in Bloomfield. Used to come in better but they moved some antennas last few years. The mountain blocks me out just like Avon. I live close to Simsbury RD. Guess it works ok on their side havent been that way in awhile.

Alec
N1AJW

 

[900mhz]

It’s my understanding that CLMRN requires the interested party bring their own FCC allocated frequencies to the party? …don’t know if that’s a monumental problem or not…

Don't think that's a deal breaker. Bloomfield moved and was on UHF, Norwich moved and they were on low band.

 

[cg]

Not unless they would create a city type impact on the system. The FCC may require turning in old channels if switching to a regional system but it is not often followed around here and even less often enforced. As to finding and allocating 7/800 MHz channels and turning them over to the State, no, there is no requirement.

Now, is there any technological hurdle that would prevent all the area Hartford UHF towns from building a trunk system using all their frequencies and using the State Core? Or from Litchfield County from doing the same on VHF? Not that I have heard, but that would be a discussion for a different thread.

It’s my understanding that CLMRN requires the interested party bring their own FCC allocated frequencies to the party? …don’t know if that’s a monumental problem or not…

 

[900mhz]

Not unless they would create a city type impact on the system. The FCC may require turning in old channels if switching to a regional system but it is not often followed around here and even less often enforced. As to finding and allocating 7/800 MHz channels and turning them over to the State, no, there is no requirement.

Now, is there any technological hurdle that would prevent all the area Hartford UHF towns from building a trunk system using all their frequencies and using the State Core? Or from Litchfield County from doing the same on VHF? Not that I have heard, but that would be a discussion for a different thread.

sounds good, from the financial impact aspect, however, don't see that happening for the greater Hartford area. Especially if it is a simulcast. There are other existing licensees using some of the same frequencies along the southern shore of the state. I can see potential interference issues which would be a nightmare to prevent. Examples: Simsbury PD and New Haven Public Works use 453.750, Manchester PD and Branford PD both use 460.125, South Windsor PD and North Haven Fire use 453.775, East Hartford PD and Southern Connecticut State University PD both use 460.250. Then to add to it all, Glastonbury and Farmington PD are on 800 Mhz. There is no natural barrier to keep RF signals from migrating out of licensed coverage area. A daily example of this is 460.025, which is Hamden PD channel 1 and Tolland Fire. In the northern part of Hamden, you can clearly hear Tolland Fire with a hefty signal strength. At times, it becomes an issue with radio reception for Hamden PD...I have spoken to several officers who have noted this interference is troublesome at times.
Then again, you will have municipalities who would refuse to relinquish total control of their own systems. Now, if we had a true county form of government like most states have, it would be a different story.

 

[cg]

The technology exists to make just about anything work. The political will (and egos) does not.