Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [ArizonaScanner.com] Re: Pinal County Sheriff Helicopter Identifier...

Expand Messages
  • Jon M. Hanson
    A 962 isn t a 9-code like the 10-codes you re thinking of (I think California even has 11-codes too). Those are just incident codes. In this case a 962 is a
    Message 1 of 17 , Jan 3, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      A 962 isn't a 9-code like the 10-codes you're thinking of (I think California even has 11-codes too). Those are just incident codes. In this case a 962 is a car accident. The Southwest Frequency Directory has them for most agencies and a lot of them are common between agencies. If you listen to the context of the dispatch it isn't too hard to figure out what the incident code means.

      Sent from my iPhone

      On Jan 3, 2012, at 9:11 AM, "sh9730" <johnmsandiego@...> wrote:

      > Dan,
      >
      > Thanks for the info. Totally agree that it is important for another agency unit to ID with agency (be it air or ground) on another air...interestingly Orange County CA has a pretty good system for this, as each agency has a two digit prefix, i.e. the 18xxx units are OC Sheriff, and the 23xxx units are a different PD....that way when they work off of a single channel (they have a great mutual aid communications system in OC) any dispatcher immediately knows which agency is talking...then the base station is that number - i.e. "station 18".
      >
      > But, Im basing my comments on my personal experience of more than 20 years in LE, both in communications and the field, not just "listening pleasure". Again, so much of this is just what you are used to....since moving over here I still am not used to the "8 codes" and "9 codes" (i.e. 962 etc..) instead of the 10 and 11 codes.
      >
      > In the end, everyone seems to get where they need to go...no matter the little differences!
      >
      > Still havent actually seemed to have gotten a firm answer on my original post though about PCSO helicopter ID.....I guess time will tell...
      >
      > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, Dan Danz <lwdanz@...> wrote:
      > >
      > > Â Well dps went to tucson ranger and phoenix ranger as opposed to the numbered ones just to eliminate the confusion about which air unit was responding. If you're at a scene in Wickenberg, hearing that Kingman Ranger is responding sets proper expectations, and you don't have to remember, for example, where Ranger 42 was stationed (Fire Station 42 in Phoenix).
      > >
      > > And then there's the excellent scheme that Phx PD uses. Â Air-nn where nn is the hour they go 10-7 on their own frequencies and Firebird-n on other channels, including aviation freqs. Â Mesa does similar...Air-n on their channels, Mesa Air-n on others and Falcon-n on aviation.
      > >
      > > The use of agency prefix on other agency channels is MANDATORY for the first few transmissions, and applies to vehicles and portables as well. Â Just listen to the DUI task forces, or a multi-agency pursuit. Â It would be very confusing for dispatchers if they didn't do it.
      > >
      > > Some times you scanner folks need reminding that callsigns and radio policies aren't established for your eavesdropping enjoyment. :-)Â
      > >
      > > -a dispatcher-sh9730 <johnmsandiego@...> wrote:Well, clearly its not a BIG deal - just a personal preference thing more than anything else...just what Im used to...actually I d be fine with "air 1" etc. like LAPD and LASO does....but given the high amount of interagency use helicopters do nowadays I get that it actually makes the radio ID LONGER when they have to go on Mesa PD air and say MCSO Air 1, etc.....
      > >
      > > Like I say, that part of my post is just a little personal quirk...its no biggie....I was really going to be confused if the PCSO helicopter was ALSO, going to be RANGER also...which (so far at least) appears NOT to be the case..
      > >
      > > Im actually not that big of a fan of "plain talk" either, even though I completely understand the reasons why there is a push towards it....but that is an entire different post! LOL
      > >
      > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke" <lumpy@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > sh9730:
      > > >
      > > > > Actually I ve always thought it kindof confusing for all the DPS
      > > > > helicopters to all be identified as "Phoenix Ranger" or "Tucson
      > > > > Ranger"....why not RANGER 1 and RANGER 3 etc...
      > > >
      > > > You think "Ranger 1" and "Ranger 3" would be LESS
      > > > confusing than "Phoenix Ranger" and "Tucson Ranger"?
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke
      > > >
      > > > www.n0eq.com
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • sh9730
      Jon, Sorry if I wasnt clear - I UNDERSTAND the 8 and 9 codes vs. the 10 and 11 codes (i.e. 962 = 1182 - non injury accident), and yes I ve been here long
      Message 2 of 17 , Jan 3, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Jon,

        Sorry if I wasnt clear - I UNDERSTAND the 8 and 9 codes vs. the 10 and 11 codes (i.e. 962 = 1182 - non injury accident), and yes I ve been here long enough to have figured them out...what I was saying is given all the years I listened to the others at work...Im not USED to hearing them! LOL

        Believe me, even in CA there are many many variations from agency to agency, hence the push to "plain talk" a few years ago...that sort of went by the wayside though..which as I said before is ok with me...

        As funny as it sounds, I laugh when I hear a few incident codes here in AZ like 211 and 459...those are codes based upon the CALIFORNIA penal code (211 PC is robbery and 459 PC is burglary), and I know those dont corespond to the same ARS codes here....but I think those are APCO codes that somehow have stuck here and elsewhere....

        Again, please dont think Im adamantly saying one is better than the other!! Just talkin...
        --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "Jon M. Hanson" <jon@...> wrote:
        >
        > A 962 isn't a 9-code like the 10-codes you're thinking of (I think California even has 11-codes too). Those are just incident codes. In this case a 962 is a car accident. The Southwest Frequency Directory has them for most agencies and a lot of them are common between agencies. If you listen to the context of the dispatch it isn't too hard to figure out what the incident code means.
        >
        > Sent from my iPhone
        >
        > On Jan 3, 2012, at 9:11 AM, "sh9730" <johnmsandiego@...> wrote:
        >
        > > Dan,
        > >
        > > Thanks for the info. Totally agree that it is important for another agency unit to ID with agency (be it air or ground) on another air...interestingly Orange County CA has a pretty good system for this, as each agency has a two digit prefix, i.e. the 18xxx units are OC Sheriff, and the 23xxx units are a different PD....that way when they work off of a single channel (they have a great mutual aid communications system in OC) any dispatcher immediately knows which agency is talking...then the base station is that number - i.e. "station 18".
        > >
        > > But, Im basing my comments on my personal experience of more than 20 years in LE, both in communications and the field, not just "listening pleasure". Again, so much of this is just what you are used to....since moving over here I still am not used to the "8 codes" and "9 codes" (i.e. 962 etc..) instead of the 10 and 11 codes.
        > >
        > > In the end, everyone seems to get where they need to go...no matter the little differences!
        > >
        > > Still havent actually seemed to have gotten a firm answer on my original post though about PCSO helicopter ID.....I guess time will tell...
        > >
        > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, Dan Danz <lwdanz@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Â Well dps went to tucson ranger and phoenix ranger as opposed to the numbered ones just to eliminate the confusion about which air unit was responding. If you're at a scene in Wickenberg, hearing that Kingman Ranger is responding sets proper expectations, and you don't have to remember, for example, where Ranger 42 was stationed (Fire Station 42 in Phoenix).
        > > >
        > > > And then there's the excellent scheme that Phx PD uses. Â Air-nn where nn is the hour they go 10-7 on their own frequencies and Firebird-n on other channels, including aviation freqs. Â Mesa does similar...Air-n on their channels, Mesa Air-n on others and Falcon-n on aviation.
        > > >
        > > > The use of agency prefix on other agency channels is MANDATORY for the first few transmissions, and applies to vehicles and portables as well. Â Just listen to the DUI task forces, or a multi-agency pursuit. Â It would be very confusing for dispatchers if they didn't do it.
        > > >
        > > > Some times you scanner folks need reminding that callsigns and radio policies aren't established for your eavesdropping enjoyment. :-)Â
        > > >
        > > > -a dispatcher-sh9730 <johnmsandiego@> wrote:Well, clearly its not a BIG deal - just a personal preference thing more than anything else...just what Im used to...actually I d be fine with "air 1" etc. like LAPD and LASO does....but given the high amount of interagency use helicopters do nowadays I get that it actually makes the radio ID LONGER when they have to go on Mesa PD air and say MCSO Air 1, etc.....
        > > >
        > > > Like I say, that part of my post is just a little personal quirk...its no biggie....I was really going to be confused if the PCSO helicopter was ALSO, going to be RANGER also...which (so far at least) appears NOT to be the case..
        > > >
        > > > Im actually not that big of a fan of "plain talk" either, even though I completely understand the reasons why there is a push towards it....but that is an entire different post! LOL
        > > >
        > > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke" <lumpy@> wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > > sh9730:
        > > > >
        > > > > > Actually I ve always thought it kindof confusing for all the DPS
        > > > > > helicopters to all be identified as "Phoenix Ranger" or "Tucson
        > > > > > Ranger"....why not RANGER 1 and RANGER 3 etc...
        > > > >
        > > > > You think "Ranger 1" and "Ranger 3" would be LESS
        > > > > confusing than "Phoenix Ranger" and "Tucson Ranger"?
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke
        > > > >
        > > > > www.n0eq.com
        > > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      • sh9730
        OK, hopefully my original question is now all confirmed... Just heard RAVEN 1 on CGPD air again and two things confirm to me this IS the PCSO helicopter.
        Message 3 of 17 , Jan 3, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          OK, hopefully my original question is now all confirmed...

          Just heard "RAVEN 1" on CGPD air again and two things confirm to me this IS the PCSO helicopter. First, they were at the CGPD airport picking up an ID tech to do some photos (most likely related to the PCSO shooting incident in town here over New Years), which seems like a PCSO function...

          AND

          While this was happening a PCSO unit came up on the CGPD air asking if the "county helo RAVEN 1" was on the air. RAVEN 1 answered and they had some discussion about a call pending (drug and weapons found) as soon as they could clear.

          SO, Im pretty sure this is in fact a PCSO helicopter now in service, and the ID is RAVEN 1. Still not 100% sure its an MD500, but Im pretty sure.

          Thanks for all the input....hope this helps others monitoring.



          --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, Dan Danz <lwdanz@...> wrote:
          >
          >  Well dps went to tucson ranger and phoenix ranger as opposed to the numbered ones just to eliminate the confusion about which air unit was responding. If you're at a scene in Wickenberg, hearing that Kingman Ranger is responding sets proper expectations, and you don't have to remember, for example, where Ranger 42 was stationed (Fire Station 42 in Phoenix).
          >
          > And then there's the excellent scheme that Phx PD uses.  Air-nn where nn is the hour they go 10-7 on their own frequencies and Firebird-n on other channels, including aviation freqs.  Mesa does similar...Air-n on their channels, Mesa Air-n on others and Falcon-n on aviation.
          >
          > The use of agency prefix on other agency channels is MANDATORY for the first few transmissions, and applies to vehicles and portables as well.  Just listen to the DUI task forces, or a multi-agency pursuit.  It would be very confusing for dispatchers if they didn't do it.
          >
          > Some times you scanner folks need reminding that callsigns and radio policies aren't established for your eavesdropping enjoyment. :-) 
          >
          > -a dispatcher-sh9730 <johnmsandiego@...> wrote:Well, clearly its not a BIG deal - just a personal preference thing more than anything else...just what Im used to...actually I d be fine with "air 1" etc. like LAPD and LASO does....but given the high amount of interagency use helicopters do nowadays I get that it actually makes the radio ID LONGER when they have to go on Mesa PD air and say MCSO Air 1, etc.....
          >
          > Like I say, that part of my post is just a little personal quirk...its no biggie....I was really going to be confused if the PCSO helicopter was ALSO, going to be RANGER also...which (so far at least) appears NOT to be the case..
          >
          > Im actually not that big of a fan of "plain talk" either, even though I completely understand the reasons why there is a push towards it....but that is an entire different post! LOL
          >
          > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke" <lumpy@> wrote:
          > >
          > > sh9730:
          > >
          > > > Actually I ve always thought it kindof confusing for all the DPS
          > > > helicopters to all be identified as "Phoenix Ranger" or "Tucson
          > > > Ranger"....why not RANGER 1 and RANGER 3 etc...
          > >
          > > You think "Ranger 1" and "Ranger 3" would be LESS
          > > confusing than "Phoenix Ranger" and "Tucson Ranger"?
          > >
          > >
          > > Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke
          > >
          > > www.n0eq.com
          > >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        • sh9730
          Sorry - one more - I just SAW the helicopter as it returned to CG Airport....it is in fact an MD500 (or VERY similar) and it LOOKS like its blue in color,
          Message 4 of 17 , Jan 3, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            Sorry - one more - I just SAW the helicopter as it returned to CG Airport....it is in fact an MD500 (or VERY similar) and it LOOKS like its blue in color, though I cant confirm that for sure...

            SO, now Im officially done with this! LOL

            --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "sh9730" <johnmsandiego@...> wrote:
            >
            > OK, hopefully my original question is now all confirmed...
            >
            > Just heard "RAVEN 1" on CGPD air again and two things confirm to me this IS the PCSO helicopter. First, they were at the CGPD airport picking up an ID tech to do some photos (most likely related to the PCSO shooting incident in town here over New Years), which seems like a PCSO function...
            >
            > AND
            >
            > While this was happening a PCSO unit came up on the CGPD air asking if the "county helo RAVEN 1" was on the air. RAVEN 1 answered and they had some discussion about a call pending (drug and weapons found) as soon as they could clear.
            >
            > SO, Im pretty sure this is in fact a PCSO helicopter now in service, and the ID is RAVEN 1. Still not 100% sure its an MD500, but Im pretty sure.
            >
            > Thanks for all the input....hope this helps others monitoring.
            >
            >
            >
            > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, Dan Danz <lwdanz@> wrote:
            > >
            > >  Well dps went to tucson ranger and phoenix ranger as opposed to the numbered ones just to eliminate the confusion about which air unit was responding. If you're at a scene in Wickenberg, hearing that Kingman Ranger is responding sets proper expectations, and you don't have to remember, for example, where Ranger 42 was stationed (Fire Station 42 in Phoenix).
            > >
            > > And then there's the excellent scheme that Phx PD uses.  Air-nn where nn is the hour they go 10-7 on their own frequencies and Firebird-n on other channels, including aviation freqs.  Mesa does similar...Air-n on their channels, Mesa Air-n on others and Falcon-n on aviation.
            > >
            > > The use of agency prefix on other agency channels is MANDATORY for the first few transmissions, and applies to vehicles and portables as well.  Just listen to the DUI task forces, or a multi-agency pursuit.  It would be very confusing for dispatchers if they didn't do it.
            > >
            > > Some times you scanner folks need reminding that callsigns and radio policies aren't established for your eavesdropping enjoyment. :-) 
            > >
            > > -a dispatcher-sh9730 <johnmsandiego@> wrote:Well, clearly its not a BIG deal - just a personal preference thing more than anything else...just what Im used to...actually I d be fine with "air 1" etc. like LAPD and LASO does....but given the high amount of interagency use helicopters do nowadays I get that it actually makes the radio ID LONGER when they have to go on Mesa PD air and say MCSO Air 1, etc.....
            > >
            > > Like I say, that part of my post is just a little personal quirk...its no biggie....I was really going to be confused if the PCSO helicopter was ALSO, going to be RANGER also...which (so far at least) appears NOT to be the case..
            > >
            > > Im actually not that big of a fan of "plain talk" either, even though I completely understand the reasons why there is a push towards it....but that is an entire different post! LOL
            > >
            > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke" <lumpy@> wrote:
            > > >
            > > > sh9730:
            > > >
            > > > > Actually I ve always thought it kindof confusing for all the DPS
            > > > > helicopters to all be identified as "Phoenix Ranger" or "Tucson
            > > > > Ranger"....why not RANGER 1 and RANGER 3 etc...
            > > >
            > > > You think "Ranger 1" and "Ranger 3" would be LESS
            > > > confusing than "Phoenix Ranger" and "Tucson Ranger"?
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke
            > > >
            > > > www.n0eq.com
            > > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            > >
            >
          • n7qyk@cox.net
            If you can get an actual tail number we can look it up and get a model number that way. Maybe also if they use the N Number on the tower frequency at the
            Message 5 of 17 , Jan 3, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              If you can get an actual tail number we can look it up and get a model number that way. Maybe also if they use the 'N' Number on the tower frequency at the airport too.

              Roy ICP963

              ---- sh9730 <johnmsandiego@...> wrote:
              > Sorry - one more - I just SAW the helicopter as it returned to CG Airport....it is in fact an MD500 (or VERY similar) and it LOOKS like its blue in color, though I cant confirm that for sure...
              >
              > SO, now Im officially done with this! LOL
              >
              > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "sh9730" <johnmsandiego@...> wrote:
              > >
              > > OK, hopefully my original question is now all confirmed...
              > >
              > > Just heard "RAVEN 1" on CGPD air again and two things confirm to me this IS the PCSO helicopter. First, they were at the CGPD airport picking up an ID tech to do some photos (most likely related to the PCSO shooting incident in town here over New Years), which seems like a PCSO function...
              > >
              > > AND
              > >
              > > While this was happening a PCSO unit came up on the CGPD air asking if the "county helo RAVEN 1" was on the air. RAVEN 1 answered and they had some discussion about a call pending (drug and weapons found) as soon as they could clear.
              > >
              > > SO, Im pretty sure this is in fact a PCSO helicopter now in service, and the ID is RAVEN 1. Still not 100% sure its an MD500, but Im pretty sure.
              > >
              > > Thanks for all the input....hope this helps others monitoring.
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, Dan Danz <lwdanz@> wrote:
              > > >
              > > >  Well dps went to tucson ranger and phoenix ranger as opposed to the numbered ones just to eliminate the confusion about which air unit was responding. If you're at a scene in Wickenberg, hearing that Kingman Ranger is responding sets proper expectations, and you don't have to remember, for example, where Ranger 42 was stationed (Fire Station 42 in Phoenix).
              > > >
              > > > And then there's the excellent scheme that Phx PD uses.  Air-nn where nn is the hour they go 10-7 on their own frequencies and Firebird-n on other channels, including aviation freqs.  Mesa does similar...Air-n on their channels, Mesa Air-n on others and Falcon-n on aviation.
              > > >
              > > > The use of agency prefix on other agency channels is MANDATORY for the first few transmissions, and applies to vehicles and portables as well.  Just listen to the DUI task forces, or a multi-agency pursuit.  It would be very confusing for dispatchers if they didn't do it.
              > > >
              > > > Some times you scanner folks need reminding that callsigns and radio policies aren't established for your eavesdropping enjoyment. :-) 
              > > >
              > > > -a dispatcher-sh9730 <johnmsandiego@> wrote:Well, clearly its not a BIG deal - just a personal preference thing more than anything else...just what Im used to...actually I d be fine with "air 1" etc. like LAPD and LASO does....but given the high amount of interagency use helicopters do nowadays I get that it actually makes the radio ID LONGER when they have to go on Mesa PD air and say MCSO Air 1, etc.....
              > > >
              > > > Like I say, that part of my post is just a little personal quirk...its no biggie....I was really going to be confused if the PCSO helicopter was ALSO, going to be RANGER also...which (so far at least) appears NOT to be the case..
              > > >
              > > > Im actually not that big of a fan of "plain talk" either, even though I completely understand the reasons why there is a push towards it....but that is an entire different post! LOL
              > > >
              > > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke" <lumpy@> wrote:
              > > > >
              > > > > sh9730:
              > > > >
              > > > > > Actually I ve always thought it kindof confusing for all the DPS
              > > > > > helicopters to all be identified as "Phoenix Ranger" or "Tucson
              > > > > > Ranger"....why not RANGER 1 and RANGER 3 etc...
              > > > >
              > > > > You think "Ranger 1" and "Ranger 3" would be LESS
              > > > > confusing than "Phoenix Ranger" and "Tucson Ranger"?
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke
              > > > >
              > > > > www.n0eq.com
              > > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              > > >
              > >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > ------------------------------------
              >
              > Check out the NEW Southwest Frequency Directory 10th Edition -
              > www.ArizonaScanner.com - The resource local experts wrote and professionals rely on!Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
            • Bill McLean
              Just FYI last night around 1-2 am PCSO called for L3 (Lieutenant?) to get Raven up and help out around Stanfield to help search for 2-3 subjects that ran from
              Message 6 of 17 , Jan 3, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                Just FYI last night around 1-2 am PCSO called for L3 (Lieutenant?) to get
                Raven up and help out around Stanfield to help search for 2-3 subjects that
                ran from a stolen county pickup after the pickup broke down after hitting a
                big pothole during a chase. They got it up about 30 minutes later and it
                was up until Border Patrol brought in Omaha from Tucson with FLIR to take
                over the search. 845 (badge #?) was to bring night vision goggles per the
                discussion from one of the Charlie 30 units who would identify himself via
                a 18?? when talking to L3 and as a Charlie 30 unit in talking to 900 (PCSO
                dispatch). They got it up about 30 minutes later and it was up until Border
                Patrol brought in Omaha from Tucson with FLIR to take over the search BP
                was called into assist because they had a K-9 and officers in the area.
                They did catch a 101 who had fallen in a small canal and was soaked but
                helped out of the canal by her accomplices. The dog tracked for awhile and
                then lost the other 1-2 and Omaha had barely gotten to the scene when they
                canceled the search. I live in Pinal county so monitor them all the time,
                They are just calling it Raven not Raven 1.

                Bill K7WWM


                On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 1:00 PM, sh9730 <johnmsandiego@...> wrote:

                > **
                >
                >
                > Sorry - one more - I just SAW the helicopter as it returned to CG
                > Airport....it is in fact an MD500 (or VERY similar) and it LOOKS like its
                > blue in color, though I cant confirm that for sure...
                >
                > SO, now Im officially done with this! LOL
                >
                >
                > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "sh9730" <johnmsandiego@...> wrote:
                > >
                > > OK, hopefully my original question is now all confirmed...
                > >
                > > Just heard "RAVEN 1" on CGPD air again and two things confirm to me this
                > IS the PCSO helicopter. First, they were at the CGPD airport picking up an
                > ID tech to do some photos (most likely related to the PCSO shooting
                > incident in town here over New Years), which seems like a PCSO function...
                > >
                > > AND
                > >
                > > While this was happening a PCSO unit came up on the CGPD air asking if
                > the "county helo RAVEN 1" was on the air. RAVEN 1 answered and they had
                > some discussion about a call pending (drug and weapons found) as soon as
                > they could clear.
                > >
                > > SO, Im pretty sure this is in fact a PCSO helicopter now in service, and
                > the ID is RAVEN 1. Still not 100% sure its an MD500, but Im pretty sure.
                > >
                > > Thanks for all the input....hope this helps others monitoring.
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, Dan Danz <lwdanz@> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > � Well dps went to tucson ranger and phoenix ranger as opposed to the
                > numbered ones just to eliminate the confusion about which air unit was
                > responding. If you're at a scene in Wickenberg, hearing that Kingman Ranger
                > is responding sets proper expectations, and you don't have to remember, for
                > example, where Ranger 42 was stationed (Fire Station 42 in Phoenix).
                > > >
                > > > And then there's the excellent scheme that Phx PD uses. � Air-nn where
                > nn is the hour they go 10-7 on their own frequencies and Firebird-n on
                > other channels, including aviation freqs. � Mesa does similar...Air-n on
                > their channels, Mesa Air-n on others and Falcon-n on aviation.
                > > >
                > > > The use of agency prefix on other agency channels is MANDATORY for the
                > first few transmissions, and applies to vehicles and portables as well.
                > � Just listen to the DUI task forces, or a multi-agency pursuit. � It would
                > be very confusing for dispatchers if they didn't do it.
                > > >
                > > > Some times you scanner folks need reminding that callsigns and radio
                > policies aren't established for your eavesdropping enjoyment. :-)�
                > > >
                > > > -a dispatcher-sh9730 <johnmsandiego@> wrote:Well, clearly its not a
                > BIG deal - just a personal preference thing more than anything else...just
                > what Im used to...actually I d be fine with "air 1" etc. like LAPD and LASO
                > does....but given the high amount of interagency use helicopters do
                > nowadays I get that it actually makes the radio ID LONGER when they have to
                > go on Mesa PD air and say MCSO Air 1, etc.....
                >
                > > >
                > > > Like I say, that part of my post is just a little personal quirk...its
                > no biggie....I was really going to be confused if the PCSO helicopter was
                > ALSO, going to be RANGER also...which (so far at least) appears NOT to be
                > the case..
                > > >
                > > > Im actually not that big of a fan of "plain talk" either, even though
                > I completely understand the reasons why there is a push towards it....but
                > that is an entire different post! LOL
                > > >
                > > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke" <lumpy@>
                > wrote:
                > > > >
                > > > > sh9730:
                > > > >
                > > > > > Actually I ve always thought it kindof confusing for all the DPS
                > > > > > helicopters to all be identified as "Phoenix Ranger" or "Tucson
                > > > > > Ranger"....why not RANGER 1 and RANGER 3 etc...
                > > > >
                > > > > You think "Ranger 1" and "Ranger 3" would be LESS
                > > > > confusing than "Phoenix Ranger" and "Tucson Ranger"?
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke
                > > > >
                > > > > www.n0eq.com
                > > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > > >
                > >
                >
                >
                >



                --
                Bill McLean
                Registered Nurse
                K7WWM


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • n7qyk@cox.net
                I heard that perimeter as well and I would swear that I heard the helicopter ID as Raven 1 on the Car to Car channel that PinalSO was using. Roy ICP963
                Message 7 of 17 , Jan 3, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  I heard that perimeter as well and I would swear that I heard the helicopter ID as "Raven 1" on the Car to Car channel that PinalSO was using.

                  Roy ICP963


                  ---- Bill McLean <bmclean1@...> wrote:
                  > Just FYI last night around 1-2 am PCSO called for L3 (Lieutenant?) to get
                  > Raven up and help out around Stanfield to help search for 2-3 subjects that
                  > ran from a stolen county pickup after the pickup broke down after hitting a
                  > big pothole during a chase. They got it up about 30 minutes later and it
                  > was up until Border Patrol brought in Omaha from Tucson with FLIR to take
                  > over the search. 845 (badge #?) was to bring night vision goggles per the
                  > discussion from one of the Charlie 30 units who would identify himself via
                  > a 18?? when talking to L3 and as a Charlie 30 unit in talking to 900 (PCSO
                  > dispatch). They got it up about 30 minutes later and it was up until Border
                  > Patrol brought in Omaha from Tucson with FLIR to take over the search BP
                  > was called into assist because they had a K-9 and officers in the area.
                  > They did catch a 101 who had fallen in a small canal and was soaked but
                  > helped out of the canal by her accomplices. The dog tracked for awhile and
                  > then lost the other 1-2 and Omaha had barely gotten to the scene when they
                  > canceled the search. I live in Pinal county so monitor them all the time,
                  > They are just calling it Raven not Raven 1.
                  >
                  > Bill K7WWM
                  >
                  >
                  > On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 1:00 PM, sh9730 <johnmsandiego@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > > **
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Sorry - one more - I just SAW the helicopter as it returned to CG
                  > > Airport....it is in fact an MD500 (or VERY similar) and it LOOKS like its
                  > > blue in color, though I cant confirm that for sure...
                  > >
                  > > SO, now Im officially done with this! LOL
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "sh9730" <johnmsandiego@...> wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > OK, hopefully my original question is now all confirmed...
                  > > >
                  > > > Just heard "RAVEN 1" on CGPD air again and two things confirm to me this
                  > > IS the PCSO helicopter. First, they were at the CGPD airport picking up an
                  > > ID tech to do some photos (most likely related to the PCSO shooting
                  > > incident in town here over New Years), which seems like a PCSO function...
                  > > >
                  > > > AND
                  > > >
                  > > > While this was happening a PCSO unit came up on the CGPD air asking if
                  > > the "county helo RAVEN 1" was on the air. RAVEN 1 answered and they had
                  > > some discussion about a call pending (drug and weapons found) as soon as
                  > > they could clear.
                  > > >
                  > > > SO, Im pretty sure this is in fact a PCSO helicopter now in service, and
                  > > the ID is RAVEN 1. Still not 100% sure its an MD500, but Im pretty sure.
                  > > >
                  > > > Thanks for all the input....hope this helps others monitoring.
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, Dan Danz <lwdanz@> wrote:
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Â Well dps went to tucson ranger and phoenix ranger as opposed to the
                  > > numbered ones just to eliminate the confusion about which air unit was
                  > > responding. If you're at a scene in Wickenberg, hearing that Kingman Ranger
                  > > is responding sets proper expectations, and you don't have to remember, for
                  > > example, where Ranger 42 was stationed (Fire Station 42 in Phoenix).
                  > > > >
                  > > > > And then there's the excellent scheme that Phx PD uses. Â Air-nn where
                  > > nn is the hour they go 10-7 on their own frequencies and Firebird-n on
                  > > other channels, including aviation freqs. Â Mesa does similar...Air-n on
                  > > their channels, Mesa Air-n on others and Falcon-n on aviation.
                  > > > >
                  > > > > The use of agency prefix on other agency channels is MANDATORY for the
                  > > first few transmissions, and applies to vehicles and portables as well.
                  > > Â Just listen to the DUI task forces, or a multi-agency pursuit. Â It would
                  > > be very confusing for dispatchers if they didn't do it.
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Some times you scanner folks need reminding that callsigns and radio
                  > > policies aren't established for your eavesdropping enjoyment. :-)Â
                  > > > >
                  > > > > -a dispatcher-sh9730 <johnmsandiego@> wrote:Well, clearly its not a
                  > > BIG deal - just a personal preference thing more than anything else...just
                  > > what Im used to...actually I d be fine with "air 1" etc. like LAPD and LASO
                  > > does....but given the high amount of interagency use helicopters do
                  > > nowadays I get that it actually makes the radio ID LONGER when they have to
                  > > go on Mesa PD air and say MCSO Air 1, etc.....
                  > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Like I say, that part of my post is just a little personal quirk...its
                  > > no biggie....I was really going to be confused if the PCSO helicopter was
                  > > ALSO, going to be RANGER also...which (so far at least) appears NOT to be
                  > > the case..
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Im actually not that big of a fan of "plain talk" either, even though
                  > > I completely understand the reasons why there is a push towards it....but
                  > > that is an entire different post! LOL
                  > > > >
                  > > > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke" <lumpy@>
                  > > wrote:
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > sh9730:
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > > Actually I ve always thought it kindof confusing for all the DPS
                  > > > > > > helicopters to all be identified as "Phoenix Ranger" or "Tucson
                  > > > > > > Ranger"....why not RANGER 1 and RANGER 3 etc...
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > You think "Ranger 1" and "Ranger 3" would be LESS
                  > > > > > confusing than "Phoenix Ranger" and "Tucson Ranger"?
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > www.n0eq.com
                  > > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  > > > >
                  > > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > --
                  > Bill McLean
                  > Registered Nurse
                  > K7WWM
                  >
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ------------------------------------
                  >
                  > Check out the NEW Southwest Frequency Directory 10th Edition -
                  > www.ArizonaScanner.com - The resource local experts wrote and professionals rely on!Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                • sh9730
                  Roy and Bill, Thanks! At least now there has been some independent confirmation other than me that it DOES exist and is called RAVEN. I too have now heard
                  Message 8 of 17 , Jan 3, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Roy and Bill,

                    Thanks! At least now there has been some independent confirmation other than me that it DOES exist and is called RAVEN. I too have now heard this unit several times and have always heard it as RAVEN 1, although it wouldnt surprise me at all if on PCSO channel 1 it gets shortened..(I dont monitor PCSO 1 very often - too much traffic that doesnt relate to me!).

                    As for getting a tail number - it was too far away for me to do so...and I dont monitor aircraft freqs either.

                    Not sure whether this gets too far out of field of this forum, but getting a callout, lift off, and onscene in Stanfield in 30 mins or so is really fast! Wonder where this thing is based? Pilot/observer may have just been hanging out at the hangar in this instance so it was quick...otherwise they would have to come in from home...who knows where they live in relationship to whichever airport...

                    Personally, I think its awesome to have this tool available directly now. Yes, they are expensive, but to those that think its a luxury, I disagree. To me air support is really VITAL in many situations...this again comes from many years of having pretty constand air support available to me, both in communications and out in the field.

                    But again, my original and followup posts were not meant to start political discussion. Was just trying to confirm the existence and ID number, which we have now done.

                    Thanks again.

                    --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, <n7qyk@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > I heard that perimeter as well and I would swear that I heard the helicopter ID as "Raven 1" on the Car to Car channel that PinalSO was using.
                    >
                    > Roy ICP963
                    >
                    >
                    > ---- Bill McLean <bmclean1@...> wrote:
                    > > Just FYI last night around 1-2 am PCSO called for L3 (Lieutenant?) to get
                    > > Raven up and help out around Stanfield to help search for 2-3 subjects that
                    > > ran from a stolen county pickup after the pickup broke down after hitting a
                  • sh9730
                    Just as a final follow up on this one - it is now 100% confirmed that this is a PCSO helicopter, it s radio ID is RAVEN 1, and it is an MD 500 version, white
                    Message 9 of 17 , Jan 12, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Just as a final follow up on this one - it is now 100% confirmed that this is a PCSO helicopter, it's radio ID is RAVEN 1, and it is an MD 500 version, white over blue and has Pinal Count Sheriff markings. I have a picture of it now....If I knew how to post here I would.

                      Thanks again all. Matter of fact they are up assisting with a foot bail in Casa Grande right now.

                      --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, <n7qyk@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > If you can get an actual tail number we can look it up and get a model number that way. Maybe also if they use the 'N' Number on the tower frequency at the airport too.
                      >
                      > Roy ICP963
                      >
                      > ---- sh9730 <johnmsandiego@...> wrote:
                      > > Sorry - one more - I just SAW the helicopter as it returned to CG Airport....it is in fact an MD500 (or VERY similar) and it LOOKS like its blue in color, though I cant confirm that for sure...
                      > >
                      > > SO, now Im officially done with this! LOL
                      > >
                      > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "sh9730" <johnmsandiego@> wrote:
                      > > >
                      > > > OK, hopefully my original question is now all confirmed...
                      > > >
                      > > > Just heard "RAVEN 1" on CGPD air again and two things confirm to me this IS the PCSO helicopter. First, they were at the CGPD airport picking up an ID tech to do some photos (most likely related to the PCSO shooting incident in town here over New Years), which seems like a PCSO function...
                      > > >
                      > > > AND
                      > > >
                      > > > While this was happening a PCSO unit came up on the CGPD air asking if the "county helo RAVEN 1" was on the air. RAVEN 1 answered and they had some discussion about a call pending (drug and weapons found) as soon as they could clear.
                      > > >
                      > > > SO, Im pretty sure this is in fact a PCSO helicopter now in service, and the ID is RAVEN 1. Still not 100% sure its an MD500, but Im pretty sure.
                      > > >
                      > > > Thanks for all the input....hope this helps others monitoring.
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, Dan Danz <lwdanz@> wrote:
                      > > > >
                      > > > >  Well dps went to tucson ranger and phoenix ranger as opposed to the numbered ones just to eliminate the confusion about which air unit was responding. If you're at a scene in Wickenberg, hearing that Kingman Ranger is responding sets proper expectations, and you don't have to remember, for example, where Ranger 42 was stationed (Fire Station 42 in Phoenix).
                      > > > >
                      > > > > And then there's the excellent scheme that Phx PD uses.  Air-nn where nn is the hour they go 10-7 on their own frequencies and Firebird-n on other channels, including aviation freqs.  Mesa does similar...Air-n on their channels, Mesa Air-n on others and Falcon-n on aviation.
                      > > > >
                      > > > > The use of agency prefix on other agency channels is MANDATORY for the first few transmissions, and applies to vehicles and portables as well.  Just listen to the DUI task forces, or a multi-agency pursuit.  It would be very confusing for dispatchers if they didn't do it.
                      > > > >
                      > > > > Some times you scanner folks need reminding that callsigns and radio policies aren't established for your eavesdropping enjoyment. :-) 
                      > > > >
                      > > > > -a dispatcher-sh9730 <johnmsandiego@> wrote:Well, clearly its not a BIG deal - just a personal preference thing more than anything else...just what Im used to...actually I d be fine with "air 1" etc. like LAPD and LASO does....but given the high amount of interagency use helicopters do nowadays I get that it actually makes the radio ID LONGER when they have to go on Mesa PD air and say MCSO Air 1, etc.....
                      > > > >
                      > > > > Like I say, that part of my post is just a little personal quirk...its no biggie....I was really going to be confused if the PCSO helicopter was ALSO, going to be RANGER also...which (so far at least) appears NOT to be the case..
                      > > > >
                      > > > > Im actually not that big of a fan of "plain talk" either, even though I completely understand the reasons why there is a push towards it....but that is an entire different post! LOL
                      > > > >
                      > > > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke" <lumpy@> wrote:
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > sh9730:
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > > Actually I ve always thought it kindof confusing for all the DPS
                      > > > > > > helicopters to all be identified as "Phoenix Ranger" or "Tucson
                      > > > > > > Ranger"....why not RANGER 1 and RANGER 3 etc...
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > You think "Ranger 1" and "Ranger 3" would be LESS
                      > > > > > confusing than "Phoenix Ranger" and "Tucson Ranger"?
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > www.n0eq.com
                      > > > > >
                      > > > >
                      > > > >
                      > > > >
                      > > > >
                      > > > >
                      > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      > > > >
                      > > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > ------------------------------------
                      > >
                      > > Check out the NEW Southwest Frequency Directory 10th Edition -
                      > > www.ArizonaScanner.com - The resource local experts wrote and professionals rely on!Yahoo! Groups Links
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      >
                    • sh9730
                      Just as a final follow up on this one - it is now 100% confirmed that this is a PCSO helicopter, it s radio ID is RAVEN 1, and it is an MD 500 version, white
                      Message 10 of 17 , Jan 12, 2012
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Just as a final follow up on this one - it is now 100% confirmed that this is a PCSO helicopter, it's radio ID is RAVEN 1, and it is an MD 500 version, white over blue and has Pinal Count Sheriff markings. I have a picture of it now....If I knew how to post here I would.

                        Thanks again all. Matter of fact they are up assisting with a foot bail in Casa Grande right now.

                        --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, <n7qyk@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > If you can get an actual tail number we can look it up and get a model number that way. Maybe also if they use the 'N' Number on the tower frequency at the airport too.
                        >
                        > Roy ICP963
                        >
                        > ---- sh9730 <johnmsandiego@...> wrote:
                        > > Sorry - one more - I just SAW the helicopter as it returned to CG Airport....it is in fact an MD500 (or VERY similar) and it LOOKS like its blue in color, though I cant confirm that for sure...
                        > >
                        > > SO, now Im officially done with this! LOL
                        > >
                        > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "sh9730" <johnmsandiego@> wrote:
                        > > >
                        > > > OK, hopefully my original question is now all confirmed...
                        > > >
                        > > > Just heard "RAVEN 1" on CGPD air again and two things confirm to me this IS the PCSO helicopter. First, they were at the CGPD airport picking up an ID tech to do some photos (most likely related to the PCSO shooting incident in town here over New Years), which seems like a PCSO function...
                        > > >
                        > > > AND
                        > > >
                        > > > While this was happening a PCSO unit came up on the CGPD air asking if the "county helo RAVEN 1" was on the air. RAVEN 1 answered and they had some discussion about a call pending (drug and weapons found) as soon as they could clear.
                        > > >
                        > > > SO, Im pretty sure this is in fact a PCSO helicopter now in service, and the ID is RAVEN 1. Still not 100% sure its an MD500, but Im pretty sure.
                        > > >
                        > > > Thanks for all the input....hope this helps others monitoring.
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, Dan Danz <lwdanz@> wrote:
                        > > > >
                        > > > >  Well dps went to tucson ranger and phoenix ranger as opposed to the numbered ones just to eliminate the confusion about which air unit was responding. If you're at a scene in Wickenberg, hearing that Kingman Ranger is responding sets proper expectations, and you don't have to remember, for example, where Ranger 42 was stationed (Fire Station 42 in Phoenix).
                        > > > >
                        > > > > And then there's the excellent scheme that Phx PD uses.  Air-nn where nn is the hour they go 10-7 on their own frequencies and Firebird-n on other channels, including aviation freqs.  Mesa does similar...Air-n on their channels, Mesa Air-n on others and Falcon-n on aviation.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > The use of agency prefix on other agency channels is MANDATORY for the first few transmissions, and applies to vehicles and portables as well.  Just listen to the DUI task forces, or a multi-agency pursuit.  It would be very confusing for dispatchers if they didn't do it.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > Some times you scanner folks need reminding that callsigns and radio policies aren't established for your eavesdropping enjoyment. :-) 
                        > > > >
                        > > > > -a dispatcher-sh9730 <johnmsandiego@> wrote:Well, clearly its not a BIG deal - just a personal preference thing more than anything else...just what Im used to...actually I d be fine with "air 1" etc. like LAPD and LASO does....but given the high amount of interagency use helicopters do nowadays I get that it actually makes the radio ID LONGER when they have to go on Mesa PD air and say MCSO Air 1, etc.....
                        > > > >
                        > > > > Like I say, that part of my post is just a little personal quirk...its no biggie....I was really going to be confused if the PCSO helicopter was ALSO, going to be RANGER also...which (so far at least) appears NOT to be the case..
                        > > > >
                        > > > > Im actually not that big of a fan of "plain talk" either, even though I completely understand the reasons why there is a push towards it....but that is an entire different post! LOL
                        > > > >
                        > > > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke" <lumpy@> wrote:
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > sh9730:
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > > Actually I ve always thought it kindof confusing for all the DPS
                        > > > > > > helicopters to all be identified as "Phoenix Ranger" or "Tucson
                        > > > > > > Ranger"....why not RANGER 1 and RANGER 3 etc...
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > You think "Ranger 1" and "Ranger 3" would be LESS
                        > > > > > confusing than "Phoenix Ranger" and "Tucson Ranger"?
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > www.n0eq.com
                        > > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        > > > >
                        > > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > ------------------------------------
                        > >
                        > > Check out the NEW Southwest Frequency Directory 10th Edition -
                        > > www.ArizonaScanner.com - The resource local experts wrote and professionals rely on!Yahoo! Groups Links
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        >
                      • ICP963
                        With the tail number of N34CT displayed Raven 1 looks to be a 1990 model McDonnell Douglas MD 500E (369E). Previously it was registered out of a company in
                        Message 11 of 17 , Jan 12, 2012
                        • 0 Attachment
                          With the tail number of N34CT displayed Raven 1 looks to be a 1990 model McDonnell Douglas MD 500E (369E). Previously it was registered out of a company in Sonora Texas with a restricted Airworthiness Certificate for aerial Surveying.

                          I wonder how much money PCSO spent, or will be spending, to equip it for law enforcement. Robinson's R-44 Raven piston helicopter comes in a law enforcement variant that is fully equipped with FLIR for about what PCSO paid for a 22 year old turbine helicopter that needs to be outfitted for the role.

                          Roy ICP963

                          --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "sh9730" <johnmsandiego@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Just as a final follow up on this one - it is now 100% confirmed that this is a PCSO helicopter, it's radio ID is RAVEN 1, and it is an MD 500 version, white over blue and has Pinal Count Sheriff markings. I have a picture of it now....If I knew how to post here I would.
                          >
                          > Thanks again all. Matter of fact they are up assisting with a foot bail in Casa Grande right now.
                          >
                          > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, <n7qyk@> wrote:
                          > >
                          > > If you can get an actual tail number we can look it up and get a model number that way. Maybe also if they use the 'N' Number on the tower frequency at the airport too.
                          > >
                          > > Roy ICP963
                          > >
                          > > ---- sh9730 <johnmsandiego@> wrote:
                          > > > Sorry - one more - I just SAW the helicopter as it returned to CG Airport....it is in fact an MD500 (or VERY similar) and it LOOKS like its blue in color, though I cant confirm that for sure...
                          > > >
                          > > > SO, now Im officially done with this! LOL
                          > > >
                          > > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "sh9730" <johnmsandiego@> wrote:
                          > > > >
                          > > > > OK, hopefully my original question is now all confirmed...
                          > > > >
                          > > > > Just heard "RAVEN 1" on CGPD air again and two things confirm to me this IS the PCSO helicopter. First, they were at the CGPD airport picking up an ID tech to do some photos (most likely related to the PCSO shooting incident in town here over New Years), which seems like a PCSO function...
                          > > > >
                          > > > > AND
                          > > > >
                          > > > > While this was happening a PCSO unit came up on the CGPD air asking if the "county helo RAVEN 1" was on the air. RAVEN 1 answered and they had some discussion about a call pending (drug and weapons found) as soon as they could clear.
                          > > > >
                          > > > > SO, Im pretty sure this is in fact a PCSO helicopter now in service, and the ID is RAVEN 1. Still not 100% sure its an MD500, but Im pretty sure.
                          > > > >
                          > > > > Thanks for all the input....hope this helps others monitoring.
                          > > > >
                          > > > >
                          > > > >
                          > > > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, Dan Danz <lwdanz@> wrote:
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >  Well dps went to tucson ranger and phoenix ranger as opposed to the numbered ones just to eliminate the confusion about which air unit was responding. If you're at a scene in Wickenberg, hearing that Kingman Ranger is responding sets proper expectations, and you don't have to remember, for example, where Ranger 42 was stationed (Fire Station 42 in Phoenix).
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > And then there's the excellent scheme that Phx PD uses.  Air-nn where nn is the hour they go 10-7 on their own frequencies and Firebird-n on other channels, including aviation freqs.  Mesa does similar...Air-n on their channels, Mesa Air-n on others and Falcon-n on aviation.
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > The use of agency prefix on other agency channels is MANDATORY for the first few transmissions, and applies to vehicles and portables as well.  Just listen to the DUI task forces, or a multi-agency pursuit.  It would be very confusing for dispatchers if they didn't do it.
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > Some times you scanner folks need reminding that callsigns and radio policies aren't established for your eavesdropping enjoyment. :-) 
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > -a dispatcher-sh9730 <johnmsandiego@> wrote:Well, clearly its not a BIG deal - just a personal preference thing more than anything else...just what Im used to...actually I d be fine with "air 1" etc. like LAPD and LASO does....but given the high amount of interagency use helicopters do nowadays I get that it actually makes the radio ID LONGER when they have to go on Mesa PD air and say MCSO Air 1, etc.....
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > Like I say, that part of my post is just a little personal quirk...its no biggie....I was really going to be confused if the PCSO helicopter was ALSO, going to be RANGER also...which (so far at least) appears NOT to be the case..
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > Im actually not that big of a fan of "plain talk" either, even though I completely understand the reasons why there is a push towards it....but that is an entire different post! LOL
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > --- In ArizonaScanner@yahoogroups.com, "Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke" <lumpy@> wrote:
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > sh9730:
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > Actually I ve always thought it kindof confusing for all the DPS
                          > > > > > > > helicopters to all be identified as "Phoenix Ranger" or "Tucson
                          > > > > > > > Ranger"....why not RANGER 1 and RANGER 3 etc...
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > You think "Ranger 1" and "Ranger 3" would be LESS
                          > > > > > > confusing than "Phoenix Ranger" and "Tucson Ranger"?
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > www.n0eq.com
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          > > > > >
                          > > > >
                          > > >
                          > > >
                          > > >
                          > > >
                          > > > ------------------------------------
                          > > >
                          > > > Check out the NEW Southwest Frequency Directory 10th Edition -
                          > > > www.ArizonaScanner.com - The resource local experts wrote and professionals rely on!Yahoo! Groups Links
                          > > >
                          > > >
                          > > >
                          > >
                          >
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.