From: scanont@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tue Apr 08 2003 - 21:55:11 EDT
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get a FREE REFINANCE QUOTE - click here!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/2CXtTB/ca0FAA/i5gGAA/ELTolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Looking for trunked radio information?
Try http://www.trunkedradio.net.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 25 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. PM in london
From: "Ian Howes" <ian_howes@hotmail.com>
2. Re: Boneheads 'pirates' on FRS
From: "parkingcontrol" <parkingcontrol@rogers.com>
3. Re: Traffic Warning Systems
From: "parkingcontrol" <parkingcontrol@rogers.com>
4. Re: White/Amber Lightbar
From: "parkingcontrol" <parkingcontrol@rogers.com>
5. RE: White/Amber Lightbar
From: "SJA505" <sja505@rogers.com>
6. Re: Toronto Fire units
From: "I Fyt Fyrs" <ifytfyrs@rogers.com>
7. Re: Trunk tracking scanner for Ontario
From: Chris Fortner <forts@rogers.com>
8. Re: Trunk tracking scanner for Ontario
From: ted hay <tedh1@sympatico.ca>
9. Re: Trunk tracking scanner for Ontario
From: Chris Fortner <forts@rogers.com>
10. Re: Ministry of finances
From: Paul Schmidt <pschmidt@interlog.com>
11. VHF Mil Freqs. Petawawa-Ottawa
From: "Champ" <Champ@scanneraudio.com>
12. Indoor antennas
From: Paul Schmidt <pschmidt@interlog.com>
13. End of an era for weather centre
From: "Champ" <Champ@scanneraudio.com>
14. Re: Re: Perth ON Freqs
From: "Champ" <Champ@scanneraudio.com>
15. Re: Indoor antennas
From: Zach Samson <phillyflyers50@comcast.net>
16. Marine frequencies
From: Bryan <bryanpass@rogers.com>
17. Re: Marine frequencies
From: Zach Samson <phillyflyers50@comcast.net>
18. Re: VHF Mil Freqs. Petawawa-Ottawa
From: "glen282001" <unicorn1717@hotmail.com>
19. Re: Marine frequencies
From: Bryan <bryanpass@rogers.com>
20. Re: Marine frequencies
From: Zach Samson <phillyflyers50@comcast.net>
21. Re: Re: VHF Mil Freqs. Petawawa-Ottawa
From: Steve Jones <sdjones@isys.ca>
22. 141.63 and 107.2 PL marker
From: "radio" <radio@slakeyourthirst.com>
23. Re: End of an era for weather centre
From: "Marc Fitkin" <marc022774@yahoo.com>
24. Re: 141.63 and 107.2 PL marker
From: Steve Jones <sdjones@isys.ca>
25. Re: Marine frequencies
From: "Mike Ciupa" <mciupa@excite.com>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 14:32:48 -0400
From: "Ian Howes" <ian_howes@hotmail.com>
Subject: PM in london
Just a heads up to all those in London.
Jean Cretien will be visiting UWO at 7:00pm, does anybody know of any comms that will be in the clear? I'll be in class then but maybe ther'll be some clear simplex going on.
Ian
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 01:14:13 -0000
From: "parkingcontrol" <parkingcontrol@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Boneheads 'pirates' on FRS
A foxhunt you say....well that sounds like fun....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bryan" <bryanpass@rogers.com>
To: <scanont@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 8:09 PM
Subject: [Scanont] Boneheads 'pirates' on FRS
> Anyone else in West-end Toronto hear the idiots that have been on FRS
> lately? They're using these GMRS radios from the States and
> transmitting around 2-5 watts on channel one, bragging about how
> powerful their signal is, harassing the 'locals' (including children).
> and waiting for their 'boosters' to come. A friend of mine pointed them
> out to me, and its a hoot to listen to. Not only are they dumb enough
> to use their real names, they pretty much give away where they are and
> what they use, and they obviously have no clue about radio or anything
> like that. Anyone care to go on a foxhunt? :)
>
> I guess if you're gonna be a big-time radio pirate, you might as well
> go for broke and take over FRS (shakes head). Yeesh. At least they
> lack the brains to be hacking into the police radio system. Someone's
> been blasting them with some sort of tone, and that seems to piss them
> off. :)
>
> Doesn't matter.. I hear through the grapevine that IC's aware of them
> and hopefully they'll be stopped soon.
>
> Grin. Keep playing with your toys, boys - you'll get caught sooner or
> later.
>
>
>
> Looking for trunked radio information?
> Try http://www.trunkedradio.net.
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 13:47:06 -0000
From: "parkingcontrol" <parkingcontrol@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Traffic Warning Systems
I stand (or sit) corrected...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Iszak" <mike@warpzone.ca>
To: <scanont@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 9:39 AM
Subject: RE: [Scanont] Traffic Warning Systems
> That's not incorrect.
>
> You can have white lights to the front AND back of the vehicle.
>
>
> The only stipulation is that you cannot have alternating headlamps.
>
>
>
> This has been verified by SEVERAL police officers, both OPP and TPS.
>
>
> M
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Looking for trunked radio information?
> Try http://www.trunkedradio.net.
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 01:16:07 -0000
From: "parkingcontrol" <parkingcontrol@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: White/Amber Lightbar
You sure about that Mike...
You said
"As for red, you cannot have red facing the front or the back. The only
exception to this is brake lights, turn signals and 4-way flashers.
What a lot of people do is set up an alternating flasher to flash the
brake lights, then reverse lights, then brake lights, etc... That is
perfectly legal, because both red lights come on at the same time, just
the same as the 4-way flashers do.'
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Iszak" <mike@warpzone.ca>
To: <scanont@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 8:48 PM
Subject: [Scanont] White/Amber Lightbar
> I know this is offtopic, so I'll make it quick..
>
> The HTA doesn't have any regulations regarding amber lights, so
> therefore, you can do whatever you want with them.
>
> As for white... The only limitation it specifies is that you cannot
> have alternating high-beam headlamps. Other than that, it's all good.
> So, if you wanted to have white strobes or a white lightbar facing
> either the front or the rear, you're okay.
>
> As for red, you cannot have red facing the front or the back. The only
> exception to this is brake lights, turn signals and 4-way flashers.
> What a lot of people do is set up an alternating flasher to flash the
> brake lights, then reverse lights, then brake lights, etc... That is
> perfectly legal, because both red lights come on at the same time, just
> the same as the 4-way flashers do.
>
>
> M
>
>
>
>
>
> Looking for trunked radio information?
> Try http://www.trunkedradio.net.
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 15:30:19 -0400
From: "SJA505" <sja505@rogers.com>
Subject: RE: White/Amber Lightbar
Maybe I can put an end to this once and for all. The following is a
cut/paste from the Highway Traffic Act. It makes no mention of white
lights that I could find. For the full Highway Traffic Act, click the
following link.
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/DBLaws/Statutes/English/90h08_e.htm
Todd
Intermittent red light restricted
(14) Subject to subsection (15), no person shall use a lamp, other than
the vehicular hazard warning signal lamps commonly known as four way
flashers, that produces intermittent flashes of red light. R.S.O. 1990,
c. H.8, s. 62 (1-14).
Red light in front
(15) In addition to the lighting requirements in this Part, a vehicle
described in subsection (15.1) may carry lamps that cast a red light
only or such other colour of light that may, with the approval of the
ministry, be designated by a by-law of the municipality in which the
vehicle is operated, but no other motor vehicle shall carry any lamp
that casts a red light to the front.
Same
(15.1) The following are vehicles to which subsection (15) applies:
1. An ambulance, fire department vehicle, police department vehicle,
public utility emergency vehicle or school bus.
2. A ministry vehicle operated by an officer appointed to carry out this
Act, the Public Vehicles Act or the Truck Transportation Act, while the
officer is in the course of his or her employment.
Note: On a day to be named by proclamation of the Lieutenant Governor,
paragraph 2 is repealed by the Statutes of Ontario, 2002, chapter 18,
Schedule P, subsection 19 (2) and the following substituted:
2. A ministry vehicle operated by an officer appointed to carry out this
Act or the Public Vehicles Act, while the officer is in the course of
his or her employment.
See: 2002, c. 18, Sched. P, ss. 19 (2), 46 (1).
3. A vehicle while operated by a conservation officer, fishery officer,
provincial park officer or mine rescue training officer, while the
officer is in the course of his or her employment.
4. A vehicle while operated by a provincial officer designated under the
Environmental Protection Act, the Ontario Water Resources Act, or the
Pesticides Act, while the officer is in the course of his or her
employment. 1998, c. 35, s. 103.
Note: On a day to be named by proclamation of the Lieutenant Governor,
paragraph 4 is amended by the Statutes of Ontario, 2002, chapter 4,
section 64 by inserting "the Nutrient Management Act, 2002" after
"Environmental Protection Act". See: 2002, c. 4, ss. 64, 67.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 06:09:12 -0400
From: "I Fyt Fyrs" <ifytfyrs@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Toronto Fire units
You are close...
A Tower (T331) is an articulating boom aparatus with a platform at the end
(ie. Bronto). An Aerial (A441) is simply a straight ladder rig (75 - 100
feet). A Platform (PL432) is an aerial with with a platform on the tip.
In Etobicoke, PL 432 is classed as a Quint, whereas A441 and PL415 are not.
PL432 has a pump and is capable of stand-alone firefighting.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Dell" <gregdell@yahoo.com>
To: <scanont@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 12:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Scanont] Toronto Fire units
> In Toronto an Aerial is a ladder truck where as a
> Tower is a ladder truck with a platform on the end.
>
> A Pumper is just that.
>
> I think when they refer to "squad" they are talking
> about the firefighters of the whole station house.
> For example "squad 113", they have a pumper and an
> aerial, refers to the two units. (Note that this an
> inference based on what I have listened to)
>
> Greg
>
> --- Bryan <bryanpass@rogers.com> wrote:
> > What is the difference between a "Squad" unit and a
> > "Rescue" unit.
> >
> > As well, what is the difference between a "Highrise"
> > unit and a "Tower"
> > unit?
> >
> > Keep in mind I come from Peel Region, where there
> > the three main
> > vehicles are Squads, Pumpers and Aerials (grin)
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
> http://tax.yahoo.com
>
>
> Looking for trunked radio information?
> Try http://www.trunkedradio.net.
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 16:45:01 -0400
From: Chris Fortner <forts@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Trunk tracking scanner for Ontario
At 03:27 PM 4/8/2003 +0000, you wrote:
>Greetings. I've seen from various posts that one would need to
>purchase more than one scanner in order to scan different trunked
>systems around the province. I live in Chatham-Kent where the EDACS
>system is used, but I also want to scan the Ontario Fleetnet for OPP
>and MOH, especially when the ambulance is migrated to the Fleetnet
>system. However I'm seeing that one scanner cannot do all that I
>want. Is this true? Can anybody suggest the best scanner that will
>do the most for me? I have done some reading on the PRO-95 and
>people seem to be happy, but it won't do Fleetnet, correct?
I've currently got an older Pro-92 programmed for the Fleetnet system and
the Chatham-Kent EDACS system (and 2 London EDACS systems as well). If you
aren't interested in listening to digital stuff, most of the recent Trunk
Trackers will do what you are looking for...Pro-92/95, BC245 or 780XLT etc
etc. The Pro-92 does't 'technically' do VHF trunking, but it seems to work
ok for me. As for the Chatham-Kent system all the PD talkgroups are
ProVoice digital, so you are outta luck there. Fire and some utility guys
are on the system in analog mode though.
Chris Fortner
London, Ontario Canada
forts@rogers.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 15:46:27 -0400
From: ted hay <tedh1@sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Trunk tracking scanner for Ontario
Chris Fortner wrote:
> aren't interested in listening to digital stuff, most of the recent Trunk
> Trackers will do what you are looking for...Pro-92/95, BC245 or 780XLT etc
> etc. The Pro-92 does't 'technically' do VHF trunking, but it seems to work
> ok for me. As for the Chatham-Kent system all the PD talkgroups are
> ProVoice digital, so you are outta luck there. Fire and some utility guys
> are on the system in analog mode though.
The Pro 95 won't VHF trunk. My experience with the Pro 92 is version 1.0 will
work, later versions have the audio break up in closed mode for some reason.
Ted
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 16:56:18 -0400
From: Chris Fortner <forts@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Trunk tracking scanner for Ontario
>The Pro 95 won't VHF trunk. My experience with the Pro 92 is version 1.0 will
>work, later versions have the audio break up in closed mode for some reason.
Good to know! Thanks for pointing that out Ted... My Pro-92 is a V1.0..
Chris Fortner
London, Ontario Canada
forts@rogers.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 08:42:31 -0500
From: Paul Schmidt <pschmidt@interlog.com>
Subject: Re: Ministry of finances
On March 14, 2003 08:44 pm, VA3EAM wrote:
> A little off topic....I was awhile ago told they stop trucks and dip the
> tanks to check the fuel to make sure its diesel and not some other fuel
> oil...something to do with diesel or the other fuel oil being a different
> color....if they run with the other fuel oil then they aren't paying the
> fuel taxes....
It would still be diesel, just there are different kinds of diesel, depending
on the taxes. For example you have farm diesel, railroad diesel, and truck
diesel, there is probably also a stationary engine diesel, for generators and
the such. A dye is put into most of them, to alter the colour, so if your
running farm diesel in your truck, it better have farm plates on it, or they
will be very pleased to request your presence infront of a local judge under
charges of tax fraud.
A new problem cropped up about a year ago, farmers hauling freight with their
trucks having farm plates on them, it's not new, some farmers have been doing
it, since they first issued farm plates, but it's been on the rise, and the
government doesn't seem to care, but truckers with commercial plates, running
truck diesel, sure aren't happy about someone with cheaper plates and cheaper
fuel competing with them.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 16:22:16 -0500
From: "Champ" <Champ@scanneraudio.com>
Subject: VHF Mil Freqs. Petawawa-Ottawa
On a recent travel between Pembroke and Renfrew I seen an army helicopter
fly over. I'm just wondering what some good freqs. would be good to listen
to between Petawawa and Ottawa or whever they head eastwards. I also see a
few airplanes during the summer heading south, I would think heading to
Trenton.
I did hear something a few years ago on 157.125 but nothing major.
Thanks,
Randy-CNA01
http://newscenter.ninn.org/
Ontario-Scanner News Alerts
Become a Dispatcher Today
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.462 / Virus Database: 261 - Release Date: 13/03/2003
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 16:32:41 -0500
From: Paul Schmidt <pschmidt@interlog.com>
Subject: Indoor antennas
Dear List:
I have two dilemmas, both are antennas, ones a little OT but someone may have
ideas.
First, the telescoping antenna on the scanner, it's busted, I need a decent
indoor antenna I live in an apartment building, anyone have recommendations?
Second the TV, I decided $49 a month for cable, isn't worth it, not when you
get survivor on 5 channels, the bachelor on another 8 channels something
about recycled Baywatch bimbos on 7 more, and infomercials on the rest.
However for the occassional half hour when there is something decent on, like
a Leafs game, it would be nice it if you could actually see the puck for all
the snow. Do those powered TV antennas work? Looks like a neat concept, but
not sure it would work. Anyone have any recommendations here?
Paul
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 16:46:08 -0500
From: "Champ" <Champ@scanneraudio.com>
Subject: End of an era for weather centre
The Ottawa office's greatest triumph was helping the city through the 1998
ice storm. Kate Jaimet says some wonder what will happen when the centre
closes.
Kate Jaimet
The Ottawa Citizen
Friday, March 14, 2003
For a few weeks in early January 1998, when the city and countryside were
caked with ice, the Ottawa Weather Centre came into its glory.
It started with a warning from the severe weather forecasting office in
Toronto. Freezing rain was on the way. The meteorologists in Ottawa wove the
warning into their forecast for the area.
But this was freezing rain like no one had seen before.
"At first we knew there was an ice storm coming in. We didn't know it would
last for a week," recalled Mario Gaudette, manager of the Ottawa Weather
Centre, which is tucked away in a nondescript brick building opposite the
National Gallery on Sussex Drive
"The tendency with the models was saying it would get warmer. And then the
next day, oops, it was still freezing rain."
On and on it went for five days, kicking the Ottawa Weather Centre into high
gear. While the scientists in Toronto were fiddling with their model and
trying to figure out what had gone wrong, the meteorologists in Ottawa were
working overtime and extra shifts, fielding calls from firefighters,
ambulance crews, police officers, journalists and the general public, who
wanted to know what was going on with the weather.
Power lines started going down. At one point, the office only had
electricity from a generator. But staff knew they couldn't shut down.
"We said: We have to operate. The police need it. The fire department needs
it. To save lives," Mr. Gaudette recalled.
Soon, there will be no weather forecasters left in Ottawa. The
Meteorological Service of Canada announced yesterday it is consolidating all
forecasting in five weather centres in Halifax, Montreal, Toronto, Edmonton
and Vancouver.
Environment Minister David Anderson announced that $75 million will be spent
over the next five years to buy new technology, replace equipment and
recruit meteorologists, technicians and scientists.
Besides Ottawa, seven other regional offices will close.
But it's not as big a change for Ottawa as it might seem. In fact, Ottawa
doesn't have a long history as a forecasting centre. Before 1994, there was
a manned weather monitoring station at the Ottawa airport, but no
forecasters -- all the forecasts were done out of Montreal.
Between 1994 and 2001, Ottawa provided area forecasts for the public.
But in October 2001, Toronto took over the Ottawa weather forecasts. At that
time, Ottawa was supposed to become a centre for aviation forecasts for the
province of Ontario.
However, that plan was only partly realized, since it was difficult to
recruit people, Mr. Gaudette said.
The employees of the weather service knew the situation was in flux, and no
one was certain that the aviation forecasting would really remain in Ottawa.
In fact, yesterday's announcement takes aviation forecasting out of Ottawa
and moves it to Montreal.
Ottawa's failure to survive as a forecasting centre is a bit of a blow to
people like meteorologist Jean-Marc Couturier, who worked at weather
monitoring stations and forecasting offices across Canada before settling
down in the nation's capital.
Sure, he shrugged, the people in Toronto don't do a bad job. But there are
always effects in this region they don't know about. In fact, a
meteorologist who knows about 10 per cent of the regional effects across
Ontario is doing well.
"Personally, I think it's my local area. I can do a very nice job," Mr.
Couturier said.
As to what would happen if another ice storm hit Ottawa without any
forecasters here, neither Mr. Gaudette nor Mr. Couturier wants to go out on
a limb on that one. After all, the initial warning did come from Toronto.
And for the next two or three years at least, there will still be a couple
of meteorologists left in Ottawa, manning the 1-900 weather information
line, although they won't be doing the forecasting themselves.
"There was collaboration between the offices," Mr. Gaudette said.
"It's good to have someone here to make contacts, provide the information."
The first weather forecast out of the Ottawa office, which still hangs
framed on the wall, predicted a mix of sun and cloud for Nov. 15, 1994.
The reshaping of Canada's weather service, from 14 forecast bureaus down to
five, is also a mix of sun and cloud, in Mr. Gaudette's judgment.
On the sunny side, moving the meteorologists to larger centres will mean
they have better ongoing training with state-of-the art weather technology,
he said.
On the cloudy side, "It's not easy to end something.
"People here work hard to provide information. We have friends, people have
families. For some of them it will be tough," he said. "After the years,
we've become some kind of a family all together."
© Copyright 2003 The Ottawa Citizen
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.462 / Virus Database: 261 - Release Date: 13/03/2003
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 16:23:52 -0500
From: "Champ" <Champ@scanneraudio.com>
Subject: Re: Re: Perth ON Freqs
Thanks. I'll try this. I also think 155.040 would also be an EMS Ch. for that area.
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Ciupa
To: scanont@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2003 2:29 PM
Subject: [Scanont] Re: Perth ON Freqs
--- In scanont@yahoogroups.com, "Champ" <Champ@s...> wrote:
> Does anyone have the OPP/PD/Fire/EMS freqs. for the Perth/Smiths
> Falls/Lanark Region.
POLICE
I have: 142.125 (131.8 Hz) Perth
142.305 Smith's Falls
FIRE
167.850 Perth
153.815 Regional/County
154.070 OFM
EMS
148.210
149.170
155.040
150.100
149.440
149.605
Hopefully somebody has some OPP freq.s for you.
-Mike-
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
Looking for trunked radio information?
Try http://www.trunkedradio.net.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.462 / Virus Database: 261 - Release Date: 13/03/2003
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 15
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:17:02 -0400
From: Zach Samson <phillyflyers50@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Indoor antennas
Paul,
Try www.radioshack.com for indoor antennas. I don't have any so I can't
recommend you any yet. Second I have heard that the TV antenna's do work
okay, but I don't use them so I can't confirm it. Leafs?? GO FLYERS!!
-Zach
Philadelphia, PA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Schmidt" <pschmidt@interlog.com>
To: "Scanont" <scanont@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2003 5:32 PM
Subject: [Scanont] Indoor antennas
>
> Dear List:
>
> I have two dilemmas, both are antennas, ones a little OT but someone may
have
> ideas.
>
> First, the telescoping antenna on the scanner, it's busted, I need a
decent
> indoor antenna I live in an apartment building, anyone have
recommendations?
>
> Second the TV, I decided $49 a month for cable, isn't worth it, not when
you
> get survivor on 5 channels, the bachelor on another 8 channels something
> about recycled Baywatch bimbos on 7 more, and infomercials on the rest.
> However for the occassional half hour when there is something decent on,
like
> a Leafs game, it would be nice it if you could actually see the puck for
all
> the snow. Do those powered TV antennas work? Looks like a neat concept,
but
> not sure it would work. Anyone have any recommendations here?
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Looking for trunked radio information?
> Try http://www.trunkedradio.net.
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 16
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 18:30:56 -0400
From: Bryan <bryanpass@rogers.com>
Subject: Marine frequencies
Anyone here listen to the boats?
I'm just wondering what frequencies had the most action.
Thanks!
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 17
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 18:43:39 -0400
From: Zach Samson <phillyflyers50@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Marine frequencies
Bryan,
Channel 16, is most commonly used along with 22A. 16 is used for boat calling, distress and marina calling. 22A is used to broadcast marine information from the coast guard. Also channel 70 should not be used at all unless using DSC for distress reasons! Look for the X's under C.
-Zach
Canadian, US and International VHF Marine Frequencies
VHF Marine Frequency Allocations
U=U.S. C=Canadian I=International
CH
U
C
I
TX
RX
Usage
01A
X
156.050
Port Operation & Commercial, Selected VTS
01
X
X
156.050
160.650
Marine Operator
02
X
X
156.100
160.700
Marine Operator
03A
X
156.150
US Govt. only, Coast Guard
03
X
X
156.150
160.750
Marine Operator
04A
X
156.200
Coast Guard (Pacific Coast)
04
X
156.200
160.800
Marine Operator, Port Operation, Ship Movement
05A
X
X
156.250
Port Operation, Seattle VTS
05
X
156.250
160.850
Marine Operator, Port Operation, Ship Movement
06
X
X
X
156.300
Inter-Ship Safety
07A
X
X
156.350
Commercial
07
X
156.350
160.950
Marine Operator, Port Operation, Ship Movement
08
X
X
X
156.400
Commercial (Inter-ship only)
09
X
X
X
156.450
Boater Calling Channel, Commercial & Recreational
10
X
X
X
156.500
Commercial
11
X
X
X
156.550
Commercial, VTS (Selected areas)
12
X
X
X
156.600
Port Operation, VTS (Selected areas)
13
X
X
X
156.650
Intership Navigation Safety (bridge-to-bridge)
14
X
X
X
156.700
Port Operation, VTS (Selected areas)
15
X
-
156.750
Environmental (Receive only)
16
X
X
X
156.800
International Distress, Safety and Calling
17
X
X
X
156.850
State Controlled (?!) - 1 Watt
18A
X
X
156.900
Commercial
18
X
156.900
161.500
Port Operation, Ship movement
19A
X
156.950
Commercial
19A
X
156.950
Coast Guard
19
X
156.950
161.550
Port Operation, Ship movement
20A
X
157.000
Port Operation
20
X
X
157.000
161.600
Canadian: Coast Guard only, Intn'l: Port Operations
21A
X
X
157.050
US Gov't only, Canadian Coast Guard
21
X
157.050
161.650
Port Operation, Ship movement
22A
X
X
157.100
US & Canadian Coast Guard
22
X
157.100
161.700
Port Operation, Ship movement
23A
X
157.150
US Gov't Only
23
X
X
157.150
161.750
Marine Operator
24
X
X
X
157.200
161.800
Marine Operator
25
X
X
X
157.250
161.850
Marine Operator
26
X
X
X
157.300
161.900
Marine Operator
27
X
X
X
157.350
161.950
Marine Operator
28
X
X
X
157.400
162.000
Marine Operator
60
X
X
156.025
160.625
Marine Operator
61A
X
X
156.075
US: Gov't only, Canadian Coast Guard
61
X
156.075
160.675
Marine Operator, Port Operation, Ship Movement
62A
X
156.125
Coast Guard (Pacific Coast)
62
X
156.125
160.725
Marine Operator, Port Operation, Ship Movement
63A
X
156.175
Port Operation & Commercial, VTS (Selected areas)
63
X
156.175
160.775
Marine Operator, Port Operation, Ship Movement
64A
X
X
156.225
US: Gov't only, Canadian Commercial Fishing
64
X
156.225
160.825
Marine Operator, Port Operation, Ship Movement
65A
X
X
156.275
Port Operations
65
X
156.275
160.875
Marine Operator, Port Operation, Ship Movement
66A
X
X
156.325
Port Operations
66
X
156.325
160.925
Marine Operator, Port Operation, Ship Movement
67
X
X
X
156.375
US: Commercial, Canada: Commercial Fishing, S&R
68
X
X
X
156.425
Recreational
69
X
X
X
156.475
US: Recreational, Canada: Commercial Fishing only
70
X
X
X
156.525
DSC - no voice communications allowed
71
X
X
X
156.575
Recreational, Int'l: Port Operations
72
X
X
X
156.625
Non-Commercial (Inter-Ship Only)
73
X
X
X
156.675
US: Port Operations, Canada: Commercial Fishing only
74
X
X
X
156.725
US: Port Operations, Canada: Commercial Fishing only
77
X
X
X
156.875
Port Operations (Inter-ship only)
78A
X
X
156.925
Recreational
78
X
156.925
161.525
Marine Operator, Port Operation, Ship Movement
79A
X
X
156.975
Commercial
79
X
156.975
161.575
Port Operations and Ship Movement
80A
X
X
157.025
Commercial
80
X
157.025
161.625
Port Operation, Ship Movement
81A
X
X
157.075
US Gov't only - Environmental Protection operations
81
X
157.075
161.675
Port Operations, Ship Movement
82A
X
X
157.125
US: Gov't only, Canada: Coast Guard
82
X
157.125
161.725
Marine Operator, Port Operation, Ship Movement
83A
X
X
157.175
US: Gov't only, Canada: Coast Guard
83
X
157.175
161.775
Marine Operator
84
X
X
X
157.225
161.825
Marine Operator
85
X
X
X
157.275
161.875
Marine Operator
86
X
X
X
157.325
161.925
Marine Operator
87
X
X
X
157.375
161.975
Marine Operator
88A
X
157.425
Commercial (Inter-ship)
88
X
X
157.425
162.025
Public Correspondence (Ship-to-coast)
WX01
X
X
X
-
162.550
Weather (Receive only)
WX02
X
X
X
-
162.400
Weather (Receive only)
WX03
X
X
X
-
162.475
Weather (Receive only)
WX04
X
X
X
-
162.425
Weather (Receive only)
WX05
X
X
X
-
162.450
Weather (Receive only)
WX06
X
X
X
-
162.500
Weather (Receive only)
WX07
X
X
X
-
162.525
Weather (Receive only)
WX08
X
X
X
-
161.650
Weather (Receive only)
WX09
X
X
X
-
161.775
Weather (Receive only)
WX10
X
X
X
-
163.275
Weather (Receive only)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 18
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 22:49:23 -0000
From: "glen282001" <unicorn1717@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: VHF Mil Freqs. Petawawa-Ottawa
--- In scanont@yahoogroups.com, "Champ" <Champ@s...> wrote:
> On a recent travel between Pembroke and Renfrew I seen an army
helicopter
> fly over. I'm just wondering what some good freqs. would be good to
listen
> to between Petawawa and Ottawa or whever they head eastwards. I
also see a
I camped in the east end of Algonquin Park last summer.
Try 49.900 for the CFB Petawawa Military Range Control.
Try 278.500 as well as vhf aero for the Pembroke airport Air Traffic
Control.
Search www.canairradio.com for more on that.
I also remember seeing a listing of 40.900? for local Canadian Forces
There have to be some more in the VHF low band like 49.900 though.
I have also seen a listing in another directory for 163.050 for base
ops.
Regards,
Glen
Oshawa.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 19
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 18:50:12 -0400
From: Bryan <bryanpass@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Marine frequencies
> Channel 16, is most commonly used along with 22A. 16 is used for boat
> calling, distress and marina calling. 22A is used to broadcast marine
> information from the coast guard.\
Thanks, Zach! Much appreciated.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 20
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 18:51:54 -0400
From: Zach Samson <phillyflyers50@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Marine frequencies
Ok,
That last message obviously didn't come out right. Here's a link to that marine freqs chart...
http://www.durhamradio.com/vhf-marine-frequencies.htm
you may want to print it out for reference.
good luck,
zach
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 21
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 19:00:34 -0400
From: Steve Jones <sdjones@isys.ca>
Subject: Re: Re: VHF Mil Freqs. Petawawa-Ottawa
on 4/8/03 6:49 PM, glen282001 at unicorn1717@hotmail.com wrote:
> Try 49.900 for the CFB Petawawa Military Range Control.
Borden Range Control also uses this frequency to talk to units in the field.
I've found lots of stuff between 30 and 50Mhz but they tend to be used only
for that exercise and the next group that comes in on training uses a
different frequency.
--
Steve <sdjones@isys.ca>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 22
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 21:31:44 -0400
From: "radio" <radio@slakeyourthirst.com>
Subject: 141.63 and 107.2 PL marker
The marker signal is back on this freq, I'm hearing it tonight mobile in Barrie. I think it used to be Mount Forest or Penetang or maybe both. It is now listed as Hamilton site 7 on the new system.
Maybe it never stopped and I just couldn't hear it before tonight or is some kind of backup happening tonight?
J.
"Just watch me." Pierre Elliot Trudeau 1970
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 23
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 01:30:16 -0000
From: "Marc Fitkin" <marc022774@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: End of an era for weather centre
The biggest most pressing concern is how this will affect, if at all,
public safety. But remember, public safety is a double edged sword.
For the public thinks the sky will always be blue and that tornadoes
only occur over "there" ("there" is generally Barrie). I would
have it that my family and friends would all have WX radios w/
alert in their homes. But that's another story for weather freaks
like me in other groups and email lists.
Marc
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 24
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 21:51:19 -0400
From: Steve Jones <sdjones@isys.ca>
Subject: Re: 141.63 and 107.2 PL marker
on 4/8/03 9:31 PM, radio at radio@slakeyourthirst.com wrote:
> The marker signal is back on this freq, I'm hearing it tonight mobile in
> Barrie. I think it used to be Mount Forest or Penetang or maybe both. It is
> now listed as Hamilton site 7 on the new system.
The marker never disappeared from this frequency. It's still coming from
Penetang loud and clear for the cars dispatched by North Bay Comm Centre.
--
Steve <sdjones@isys.ca>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 25
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 01:55:03 -0000
From: "Mike Ciupa" <mciupa@excite.com>
Subject: Re: Marine frequencies
--- In scanont@yahoogroups.com, Bryan <bryanpass@r...> wrote:
> Anyone here listen to the boats?
>
> I'm just wondering what frequencies had the most action.
>
> Thanks!
Bryan,
Last summer I heard TPS Marine Unit assisting people on
Marine CH.82A(157.125) and CH 27(161.950) also a lot of
marinas are on CH.68 (156.425).
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sun Apr 13 2003 - 12:28:42 EDT