[MRIC] D-Star and SERA
Dan Blasberg
ka8ypy at verizon.net
Wed Jul 16 14:58:54 EDT 2008
While it is something we may need to be prepared for, I don't see it
as something to lose sleep over or worry about.
The repeater frequencies that each jurisdiction uses are not
changing. So why are we worrying about contacting other jurisdictions
via simplex. Most simplex operations will be done locally via
handhelds with some minimal mobile use. (Already in our plans from
last year)
And in the case of a repeater failure, everyone should have their
operators trained to go immediately to simplex operations on the
output frequency of the repeater in question. (I believe already
discussed as well)
And why can't you just turn the dial and look for an open frequency?
I know as PG County sets up for a response and gets operators in
place, we are constantly checking for clear frequencies in case we
need to move traffic off of the net. Can you guarantee that all of
the simplex frequencies you have planned are free and clear all of the
time?
So at this point in time, I see it as a non issue, at least for PG
County as we already have a process in place to verify frequencies and
usage as each incident spools up.
Dan
KA8YPY
On Jul 16, 2008, at 1:38 PM, wb0egr wrote:
> First off Brett, you need to correct the frequency spacing. It is
> 10 KHz, not MHz. 10 MHz on two meters would put the repeater
> spacings out of the band.
>
> Again, we initially find some non-traditional frequencies for
> simplex use, and share them with our members and RACES groups in
> other jurisdictions. Also, someone can monitor the output frequency
> of a primary repeater for activity and when someone comes looking
> for a specific jurisdiction, that operator can tell whomever what
> frequency to dial into their radio.
>
> We haven't interfered with one another yet and I doubt we would in
> the event of a disaster - with or without D-Star or P-25 repeaters
> present.
>
> 73,
> Pat, wb0egr
>
> brettham at aol.com wrote:
>> Thank you for your comments and ideas.
>>
>> My concern is, what do we put in our plans? We can't just turn the
>> dial and look for an open frequency during an emergency. We need to
>> have a plan so we know where to find each other, and coordinate to
>> avoid interfering with each other. Let's hear some specific
>> proposals and debate the pros and cons.
>>
>> I agree using distant repeater outputs will work locally, until T-
>> MARC permits a new digital repeater in your area at 10 MHz off,
>> because they reported it will cause interference locally (even at
>> 10 MHz off existing repeaters, the digital repeaters still
>> interfere and require distance separation from existing repeaters).
>> Also, I assume one would turn on a different PL so as not to have
>> to listen to the repeater audio. This introduces the problem that
>> someone has the wrong PL and you can't hear them (perhaps an
>> acceptable risk). But using distant repeater outputs won't work for
>> long distance (inter-jurisdictional) traffic like MEMA's high
>> simplex antennas that cover large areas. Perhaps we could reserve
>> one or two of the remaining voice simplex channels for MEMA.
>>
>> Brett
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: wb0egr <wb0egr at comcast.net>
>> To: MRIC at mailman.qth.net
>> Sent: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 11:31 pm
>> Subject: Re: [MRIC] D-Star and SERA
>>
>>
>> First, thank you Brett for bringing us up to date on what was
>> discussed at the most recent T-MARC meeting. Because of the
>> reorganizing20T-MARC has been doing to remain a viable
>> organization, many of us who are repeater owners/trustees/operators
>> were not notified of the meeting because of outdated membership
>> lists. I for one appreciate your e-mails about the meeting and what
>> transpired. I believe it is important for all to realize that T-
>> MARC is first responsible to the member clubs and individuals that
>> pay or have paid membership dues when required and that it will be
>> most responsive to them first, and then to the rest of the amateur
>> community second. Yes, I am sure that they will take RACES and ARES
>> interests into account, but their first priority is to make sure
>> that as many repeaters as is possible get along as best they can
>> with minimal interference to other repeaters in the coordination
>> area and adjacent areas. As far as the simplex frequency issue
>> goes, because of the departure from crystal controlled two meter
>> and 70 cm FM radios that were quite limited to the maximum number
>> of "memory channels", the number of standardized frequencies for
>> repeaters and simplex is not as critical as it was say 25 + years
>> ago when most amateurs were operating crystal controlled VHF and/or
>> UHF radios. Today we have VHF/UHF radios that have upwards of 1000
>> memory channels and can operate on most any frequency between
>> 144.000 and 147.995 MHz or 420.0000 - 449.9975 MHz. Hence the need
>> for "standardized" simplex frequencies is not as=2
>> 0
>> "important" as it once was. That is why I suggested we as a
>> community could (and in my humble opinion) use non-traditional or
>> non-standard frequencies for simplex use as long as they do not
>> cause interference to repeaters, packet/digital operations, SSB,
>> etc. It is just as easy for me to tune any of my radios - including
>> the FT-470 HT that I bought in 1992 - to 144.505 MHz and operate FM
>> simplex as it is tune it to 146.520 MHz and operate. What we need
>> to do, and many of us have already done so, is to see what
>> frequencies are "clear" in our respective jurisdictions from
>> repeater outputs, other modes of use, etc., and then spread the
>> word first to our members and then to our MRIC colleagues, much as
>> we did back in early 2007. We also need to stop "thinking" that
>> traditional frequencies are the only way to go and begin to think
>> "out of the box" so to speak in order to better serve our clients
>> and other served agencies in times of need. For all we know, during
>> a crisis, the "traditional standard" simplex frequencies such as
>> 146.460 or 146.520 MHz might be so crowded with non-emergency
>> amateur communications that it would be better for us to find
>> "clear" frequencies in the 144 - 145 and 147 - 148 MHz regions of
>> the two meter bands (and yes, go into the SSB areas if necessary -
>> remember we would be operating under "emergency conditions" and I
>> doubt too many of our brethren20or the FCC would squawk about FM
>> communication in the SSB portion of the band) in order to minimize
>> interference and maximize our performance. We are fortunate that
>> the Amateur Radio Service is not channelized (except for the 60
>> meter band) and that we can choose quite easily many of the
>> frequencies we can operate on just by turning the tuning dial. 73,
>> Pat, wb0egr brettham at aol.com wrote:
>>> This was all discussed at the T-MARC meeting. T-MARC is
>>> communicating
>> > with our neighbors. Part of PA is putting the digital repeaters
>> in > with their existing conventional repeater plan (no new freqs),
>> and the > rest of PA has not started discussing it yet. When
>> someone suggested > waiting for the national band plan to be
>> updated, there were many > objections that that would be a long
>> time coming, and by then digital > repeaters would be all over the
>> place so we needed to do something > soon, even if it is just
>> temporary. This could change at their next > meeting.
>>> Anyway, if you are interested in what is going on with digital >
>> repeaters, I suggest www.tmarc.org and send them an email. They are
>> > creating a thread for those that are interested in discussing
>> this. > Let's focus our emails on RACES concerns. Like: are we
>> going to be > able to get along with just 6 VHF dedicated simplex
>> voice frequencies > in Maryland where th
>> ere used to be 14, if they adopt their Appendix C > proposal (soon
>> to be published on their web site)? BTW: one of the six > is the
>> calling channel, so we really will just have 5 to work with, >
>> according to their current band plan with "Appendix C" proposed
>> changes.
>>> On the eastern shore it is pretty flat and I can hear Wicomico on >
>> simplex, which is 2 counties away. There are about 8 counties
>> within 2 > counties from Talbot, so I believe 5 channels is going
>> to be a > problem. I prefer to operate voic
>>> e simplex on frequencies that are only voice simplex, so during an >
>> emergency you can ask anyone interferring to move to another
>> channel > and yield for emergency communications. If we "plan" on
>> sharing > frequencies with digital modes, repeaters, etc, there is
>> not much we > can do during an emergency if we get interference
>> from a digital > operator.
>>> All this assumes, of course, worst case scenarios where our repeater
>> > is down and we have to use simplex. I like to plan for worse
>> case. We > intentionally did not add the repeater freq as an
>> optional simplex > channel in our plan, so that it could remain
>> available for people > working on bringing the repeater back online
>> without interferring with
>>> emergency traffic. Any ideas? Brett -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Dan
>> Blasberg <ka8ypy at verizon.net>
>>> To: wb0egr <wb0egr at comcast.net> Cc: jkryszt at pdsresearch.com; MRIC at mailman.qth.net
>>> Sent: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 2:13 pm Subject: Re: [MRIC] D-Star and
>>> SERA That would make sense to me. Since T-MARC seems to be
>>> aligning with >
>> the SERA model for D-Star and P25. > > Dan > KA8YPY > > On Jul 15,
>> 2008, at 2:09 PM, wb0egr wrote: > >> As far as knowing what goers
>> on in PA or other adjacent states, I > > think the "new" T-MARC
>> needs to open the lines of communications > > with the other
>> frequency coordinators that we are adjacent to. > Since > Dave,
>> W8AJR, is on the T-MARC executive board and is a fe
>>> llow > member of MRIC, he would be a logical pipeline of information
>> > to and > from T-MARC for MRIC. >> >> Pat, wb0egr >> >> Dan
>> Blasberg wrote: >>> Most of the restructure will cover the HF bands
>> and hardly touch >> > the VHF/UHF bands, so there may not be much
>> change. >>> >>> It would be nice to know what PA is doing as far as
>> band plans for > >> repeaters as well since they are to the north
>> of us. Anyone have >> > any idea? >>> >>> Dan >>> KA8YPY >>> >>> On
>> Jul 15, 2008, at 1:24 PM, Bob Long wrote: >>> >>>> A local ham
>> raised a question - Shouldn't the coordinating >>> > committees
>> across the country wait until the ARRL restructures the >>> > band
>> plans? >>>> Bob >>>> >>>> >>>> brettham at aol.com=2
>> 0wrote: >>>>> Bob, >>>>> >>>>> Well said! Perhaps we can put this
>> on the agenda for our Nov MRIC > >>>> meeting, to develop a formal
>> MRIC position. Thanks for providing
>>>>>>> the complete SERA band plan. >>>>> >>>>> Brett >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>
>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Bob Long
>> <rjlong61 at myactv.net> >>>>> To: MRIC at mailman.qth.net >>>>> Sent:
>> Mon, 14 Jul 2008 12:12 pm >>>>> Subject: [MRIC] D-Star and SERA
>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Here is the full band plan from SERA. Please we
>> need to be alert. > >>>> This is a change to meet the needs of one
>> set of p
>>> roducts (rather >>>> expensive as I see it) to move us into a >
>> direction that may or >>>> may not be to the advantage of Emergency
>> > Communications. Let's do >>>> a lot of research and hard thinking
>> > before we take a definitive >>>> stand on this proposal. Bob,
>> KD3JK RO > WASH * SERA FREQUENCY >>>> UTILIZATION PLAN for 144 -
>> 148 MHz* 144.000 > - 144.050 EME CW >>>> 144.050 - 144.100 General
>> CW Operation 144.100 > CW National >>>> Calling Frequency 144.100 -
>> 144.200 EME and Weak > Signal SSB >>>> 144.200 - 144.300 General
>> SSB Operation 144.200 SSB > National >>>> Calling Frequency 144.275
>> - 144.300 Propagation Beacons > 144.300 - >>>> 144.500 Multi-Mode
>> Operation 144.390 APRS Nationwide > (Mode = 1200 >>>> Baud FM
>> Packet) 144.510 - 144.890 FM and D-Star > Repeater Inputs >>>>
>> 144.910 - 145.090 FM Digital/Packet Simplex and > D-Sta
>> r Repeater >>>> Outputs 145.110 - 145.490 FM and D-Star Repeater >
>> Outputs 145.510 >>>> - 145.790 FM Digital/Packet Simplex (Auxil
>> >>>>> iary) 145.800 - 146.000 Satellite Sub-Band 146.010 - 146.385
>> FM > >>>> and APCO P25 Repeater Inputs 146.400 - 146.585 FM Voice
>> Simplex > >>>> and Alternate Repeater Inputs 146.420 - 146.480 D-
>> Star Voice >>>> > Simplex and Repeater Inputs 146.520 FM National
>> Calling Frequency >>>> > 146.610 - 147.390 FM and APCO P25 Repeater
>> Outputs 147.405 - >>>> > 147.585 FM Voice Simplex and Alternate
>> Repeater Inputs 147.420 - >>>> > 147.480 D-Star Voice Simplex and
>> Repeater Inputs 147.600 - >>>> > 147.990 FM and APCO P25 Repeater
>> Inputs >>>> >
>> ________________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>>>>>> *Repeater Sub-band 144.50 - 145.50 MHz 20 Repeater Pairs, 20 KHz
>> > >>>> spacing, 600 KHz in/out* 144.510 - 145.110 144.530 - 145.130
>> >>>> > 144.550 - 145.150 144.570 - 145.170 144.590 - 145.190
>> 144.610 - >>>> > 145.210 144.630 - 145.230 144.650 - 145.250
>> 144.670 - 145.270 >>>> > 144.690 - 145.290 144.710 - 145.310
>> 144.730 - 145.330 144,750 - >>>> > 145.350 144.770 - 145.370
>> 144.790 - 145.390 144.810 - 145.410 >>>> > 144.830 - 145.430
>> 144.850 - 145.450 144.870 - 145.470 144.890 - >>>> > 145.490 These
>> pairs are available for the coordination and >>>> > assignment of
>> analog FM repeaters. Their coordination and >>>> > assignment is
>> determined using nominal FM coordi
>> nation guidelines >>>> > and other considerations, and those
>> pertinent to co-channel and >>>> > adjacent channel assignment. *19
>> D-Star Only Repeater Pairs, 20 >>>> > KHz spacing, 600 KHz in/out*
>> 144.520 - 145.12 >>>>> 0 144.540 - 145.140 144.560 - 145.160
>> 144.580 - 145.180 144.600 - > >>>> 145.200 144.620 - 145.220
>> 144.640 - 145.240 144.660 - 145.260 > >>>> 144.680 - 145.280
>> 144.700 - 145.300 144.720 - 145.320 144.740 - > >>>> 145.340
>> 144.760 - 145.360 144,780 - 145.380 144.800 - 145.400 > >>>>
>> 144.820 - 145.420 144.840 - 145.440 144.860 - 145.460 144.880 - >
>> >>>> 145.480 These interleaved pairs are exclusively available for
>> > >>>> the coordination and assignment of D-Star digital voic
>>> e >>>> technology (*DVT*) repeaters, which is determined using
>> nominal > >>>> FM coordination guidelines and other considerations
>> relating to > >>>> the narrow bandwidth signals of *DVT* and those
>> pertinent to > co->>>> channel and adjacent channel assignment.
>> >>>> >
>> ________________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>>>>>> *D-Star Only Repeater Pairs (wide offsets)* *4 D-Star Only
>>>>>>> >>>> >
>> Repeater Pairs, 20 KHz spacing, 2500 KHz in/out* 147.420 - >>>> >
>> 144.920 147.440 - 144.940 147.460 - 144.960 147.480 - 144.980 *4
>> >>>> > D-Star Only Repeater Pairs, 20 KHz spacing, 1400 KHz in/out*
>> >>>> > 146.420 - 145.020 146.440 - 145.040 146.460 - 145.060
>> 146.480 - >>>> > 145.080 _*IMPORTANT NOTE*__*:*_ Due to the prior a
>> ssignment of >>>> > frequencies in these ranges for alternate FM
>> repeater inputs, >>>> > these D-Star only pairs may not initially
>> be available in all >>>> > areas. >>>> >
>> ________________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>>>>>> *Digital/Packe >>>>> t Simplex Frequencies* *25 Simplex
>>>>>>> Channels*
>> 144.910 144.930 >>>> > 144.950 144.970 144.990 145.010 145.030
>> 145.050 145.070 145.090 >>>> > 145.510 145.530 145.550 145.570
>> 145.590 145.610 145.630 145.650 >>>> > 145.670 145.690 145.710
>> 145.730 145.750 145.770 145.790 >>>> >
>> ________________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>>>>>> *FM Voice Simplex Frequencies* 146.400* 146.415* 146.430* >>>> >
>> 146.445* 146.460* 146.475* 146.490* 146.505* 146.520 146.535 >>>> >
>> 146.550 146.565 146.580 146.595 147.405* 1
>>> 47.420* 147.435* >>>> 147.450* 147.465* 147.480* 147.495* 147.510 >
>> 147.525 147.540 >>>> 147.555 147.570 147.585 *146.520* is the
>> National > FM Voice >>>> Simplex Calling Frequency *_IMPORTANT
>> NOTE:_* = > Frequencies >>>> marked with *** are permitted for
>> simplex use as long > as it does >>>> not cause interference to
>> nearby repeater inputs. > Please be aware >>>> that SERA
>> coordinates some of these frequencies > as repeater >>>> inputs in
>> some areas. Check the repeater directory in > your area >>>> to see
>> if any such repeaters are present. >>>> >
>> ______________________________________________________________ >>>>
>> > This email list is for the use of=2
>> 0RACES Officers and Emergency >>>> > Managers. Only email related
>> to the Maryland RACES >>>> > Interoperability Committee (MRIC) of
>> the Maryland Emergency >>>> > Management Association should be sent
>> to this email reflector >>>> > list. All emails must be in plain
>> text format (no HTML). MRIC >>>> > mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mric
>> >>>>> >>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmmain.htm Post: > mailto:MRIC at mailman.qth.net
>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>
>> ______________________________________________________________ >>>>
>> This email list is for the use of RACES Officers and Emergency >>>
>> > Managers. Only email related to the Maryland RACES >>> >
>> Interoperability Committee (MRIC) of the Maryland Emergency >>> >
>> Management Association should be sent to this email reflector >>> >
>> list. All emails must be in plain text format (no H
>>> TML). >>>> MRIC mailing list >>>> Home:
>> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mric >>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmmain.htm
>> >>>> Post: mailto:MRIC at mailman.qth.net >>> >>>
>> ______________________________________________________________ >>>
>> This email list is for the use of RACES Officers and Emergency >> >
>> Managers. Only email related to the Maryland RACES Interoperability
>> >> > Committee (MRIC) of the Maryland Emergency Management
>> Association >> > should be sent to this email reflector list. All
>> emails must be in >> > plain text format (no HTML). >>> MRIC
>> mailing list >>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mric=2
>> 0>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmmain.htm >>> Post: mailto:MRIC at mailman.qth.net
>> >>> >>> >> >>
>> ______________________________________________________________ >>
>> This email list is for the use of RACES Officers and Emergency > >
>> Managers. Only email related to the Maryland RACES Interoperability
>> > > Committee (MRIC) of the Maryland Emergency Management
>> Association > > should be sent to this email reflector list. All
>> emails must be in > > plain text format (no HTML). >> MRIC mailing
>> list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mric >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmmain.htm
>> >> Post: mailto:MRIC at mailman.qth.net > >
>> ______________________________________________________________ >
>> This email list is for the use of RACES Officers and Emergency >
>> Managers. Only email related to the Maryland RACES Interoperability
>> > Committee=2
>>> 0(MRIC) of the Maryland Emergency Management Association should be >
>> sent to this email reflector list. All emails must be in plain text
>> > format (no HTML). > MRIC mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mric
>> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmmain.htm > Post: mailto:MRIC at mailman.qth.net
>> >
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> This email list is for the use of RACES Officers and Emergency >
>> Managers. Only email related to the Maryland RACES Interoperability
>> > Committee (MRIC) of the Maryland Emergency Management Association
>> > should be sent to this email reflector list. All emails must be
>> in20> plain text format (no HTML).
>>> MRIC mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/
>>> mric Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmmain.htm Post: mailto:MRIC at mailman.qth.net
>> ______________________________________________________________ This
>> email list is for the use of RACES Officers and Emergency Managers.
>> Only email related to the Maryland RACES Interoperability Committee
>> (MRIC) of the Maryland Emergency Management Association should be
>> sent to this email reflector list. All emails must be in plain text
>> format (no HTML). MRIC mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mric
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmmain.htm Post: mailto:MRIC at mailman.qth.net
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> This email list is for the use of RACES Officers and Emergency
>> Managers. Only email related to the Maryland RACES Interoperability
>> Committee (MRIC) of the Maryland Emergency Management Association
>> should be sent to this email reflector list. All emails must be in
>> plain text format (no HTML).
>> MRIC mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mric
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmmain.htm
>> Post: mailto:MRIC at mailman.qth.net
>>
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> This email list is for the use of RACES Officers and Emergency
> Managers. Only email related to the Maryland RACES Interoperability
> Committee (MRIC) of the Maryland Emergency Management Association
> should be sent to this email reflector list. All emails must be in
> plain text format (no HTML).
> MRIC mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mric
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmmain.htm
> Post: mailto:MRIC at mailman.qth.net
More information about the MRIC
mailing list