Jefferson City, MO - State moving ahead with new emergency radio system

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Sep 23, 2007
Messages
55
700mhz or p25vhf ??

I've been getting a stream of info from some of the my radio club guys who go to the regional meetings to discuss the new radio system.....they say its going to be a 700mhz p25 system. I've heard others say its going to be a VHF P25 System. In the article and other updates it said once Nixon took office he suspended the project due to funding for its original 100+ million and has now cut it down to 87 million. This could mean one or two things....they scratched the WAIS and are continuing with the 700MHZ system.... Or they scratched the WAIS and 700mhz and are pursuing the cheaper p25 vhf system. I hope they do the VHF P25 system because from the info I was hearing about at these meeting they would have only 1 fixed location per county which is barely enough for the LO band now. If they are going to do that with 700MHZ It is going to be one of those " I told you so" deals....my county has 1 vhf repeater that's about 400ft up and in some parts of the county they can't even hit it with a 110watt vx6000 now apply that to a 700mhz system....FAIL! Guess we'll have to wait and see as more info comes out....
 

wb0wao

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
347
Location
Qulin, MO
I have been trying to figure out this entire situation since the original posting - I know what the original idea was and what they are trying to accomplish - but I just cannot figure out how they are going to do it for $87 million and cover the entire state. Just to get new gear for the MSP will entail getting mobile units for 1200+ vehicles, portables, troop dispatch centers and (if the previous poster was given the correct info) one new tower site in _each_ county.

Is it possible that they are scrapping the original idea and now just going with a system upgrade for the MSP and other state agencies? If this is the case, then I think they could do a state-wide system for $87 million - provided they don't go too wild with the concept.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2007
Messages
55
I have been trying to figure out this entire situation since the original posting - I know what the original idea was and what they are trying to accomplish - but I just cannot figure out how they are going to do it for $87 million and cover the entire state. Just to get new gear for the MSP will entail getting mobile units for 1200+ vehicles, portables, troop dispatch centers and (if the previous poster was given the correct info) one new tower site in _each_ county.

Is it possible that they are scrapping the original idea and now just going with a system upgrade for the MSP and other state agencies? If this is the case, then I think they could do a state-wide system for $87 million - provided they don't go too wild with the concept.

Knowing how government is they'll go ballistic with idea and totally screw it up....
 

shelleys1

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
173
Location
Ballwin, MO - We are moving to Austin, TX 1 Mar. 2
$87 million could not build the towers throughout the state for a new emergency radio system! (And the towers which exist are already pretty much in full use.) I don't have a clue as to what they can do with this. Most likely some consultants have given them a proposal which will end up falling far short when it comes to funding. It's what has consistently happened in the past and is obviously the case here.
 

shelleys1

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
173
Location
Ballwin, MO - We are moving to Austin, TX 1 Mar. 2
I've been getting a stream of info from some of the my radio club guys who go to the regional meetings to discuss the new radio system.....they say its going to be a 700mhz p25 system. I've heard others say its going to be a VHF P25 System. In the article and other updates it said once Nixon took office he suspended the project due to funding for its original 100+ million and has now cut it down to 87 million. This could mean one or two things....they scratched the WAIS and are continuing with the 700MHZ system.... Or they scratched the WAIS and 700mhz and are pursuing the cheaper p25 vhf system. I hope they do the VHF P25 system because from the info I was hearing about at these meeting they would have only 1 fixed location per county which is barely enough for the LO band now. If they are going to do that with 700MHZ It is going to be one of those " I told you so" deals....my county has 1 vhf repeater that's about 400ft up and in some parts of the county they can't even hit it with a 110watt vx6000 now apply that to a 700mhz system....FAIL! Guess we'll have to wait and see as more info comes out....
MSHP has a full range of 700 MHZ frequencies licensed to them and has for quite a while. That started some years back and was an interoperability project. They're doing fine on the low band right now for their current operations. Whatever this so-called emergency radio system is going to be cannot possibly happen with only $87 million to fund it! That's simply not feasible. The cost of the system itself, not inclusive of cars, handhelds, and to say nothing of other agencies being involved blows the $87 million way out of the water!
There are feasible ways to make use of the 700 MHZ frequencies and yes, make them work well. But the cost factors again won't fall within the $87 million. Even the $110 million was actually unreasonable. We're talking about a system which is statewide here! These numbers are in the range for a large county-wide system and that would be pushing it in that application. If St. Louis City would ever release what their new system had cost them, which they never would, I have no doubt it might make it to the $80 million mark (but they made some big mistakes when they spected it!).
 
Last edited:

wb0wao

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
347
Location
Qulin, MO
$87 million could not build the towers throughout the state for a new emergency radio system! (And the towers which exist are already pretty much in full use.) I don't have a clue as to what they can do with this. Most likely some consultants have given them a proposal which will end up falling far short when it comes to funding. It's what has consistently happened in the past and is obviously the case here.

I have given this some more thought - anyone wanna bet that the MSP is just gonna switch over to VHF-HI and forget about the trunking, P25, etc.? They could do that for $87 million as some of the infrastructure is already there.
 

shelleys1

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
173
Location
Ballwin, MO - We are moving to Austin, TX 1 Mar. 2
I have given this some more thought - anyone wanna bet that the MSP is just gonna switch over to VHF-HI and forget about the trunking, P25, etc.? They could do that for $87 million as some of the infrastructure is already there.

I'm sure they'd like to do that but there's too much groundwork in place for P25. I'm not sure the trunking is as important as the need for the encryption at times. Sure, they could probably go with a VHF-HI system, it would be quite a bit more efficient, distance-wise than a P25 system, but lately the "in thing" has been Moto's P25 system. *sigh* But absolutely the most important aspect will be the need, at times, for the encryption for special activities, i.e. drug enforcement, high-level political visits, etc.
If they could be guaranteed (yeah right) by Moto that the system would be as secure on VHF it would be a way to go. But then again - you have distance problems...not as badly as you do on low band, but you still have the Missouri valleys and bluffs which are horrific when it comes to breaking up VHF transmissions! UHF is another story...
We could go round and round with this and *no question* MSHP has done the same for MANY years! Missouri, along with many others, is a difficult state when it comes to radio transmission coverage. It can be done, but the costs are very high.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 23, 2007
Messages
55
the 700mhz licenses were some 9/11 grant they got for communications they have them and all EMA's got them through out the state and I guess there is only one or two sites where they have 700mhz. I think a couple are conventional repeaters and a couple that are just simplex, they just put them in to make the feds happy.

In reguards to VHF- hi. I agree the Low band works just fine. Except for encryption. They do have DDCC frequencies on VHF and TAC frequencies so it seems to me they'll probably just upgrade the lo band, but Lo band equipment is pretty hard to find sometimes when it comes to repeaters and extenders I heard someone say on another thread that some of the equipment is 30 years old and can't be replaced.

Guess we'll know when the lo band frequencies go silent or come in crystal clear wherever you are lol.
 

shelleys1

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
173
Location
Ballwin, MO - We are moving to Austin, TX 1 Mar. 2
the 700mhz licenses were some 9/11 grant they got for communications they have them and all EMA's got them through out the state and I guess there is only one or two sites where they have 700mhz. I think a couple are conventional repeaters and a couple that are just simplex, they just put them in to make the feds happy.

In reguards to VHF- hi. I agree the Low band works just fine. Except for encryption. They do have DDCC frequencies on VHF and TAC frequencies so it seems to me they'll probably just upgrade the lo band, but Lo band equipment is pretty hard to find sometimes when it comes to repeaters and extenders I heard someone say on another thread that some of the equipment is 30 years old and can't be replaced.

Guess we'll know when the lo band frequencies go silent or come in crystal clear wherever you are lol.

Neither the VHF-HI or Low work very well actually. VHF, in a state like Missouri has problems when travelling through valleys and bluffs. That's why MSHP uses extenders for their Low band. It works fairly well for them but there are better solutions. Our problem, as it is everywhere, is that a solution is very expensive and the money just isn't there. Yes, the licensing for the 700 MHZ freqs initially came out of the 911 Homeland Security grant monies. There were lots of meetings and planning for how they would be used, etc. and that dwindled away.
All of this goes back to the topic of this thread - the state supposedly going ahead with a new emergency radio system and the funds allocated to make it happen. It really doesn't matter *what* radio system we're talking about...be it VHF, UHF... whatever - the amount of money Gov. Nixon is talking about to get this system going is just not feasible, by a long shot! I've seen several systems priced out over the last 2-3 years, none of which were statewide and all of them were anywhere from $30 - 50 million. None were anything close to what would be needed for a new emergency radio system for Missouri and anyone who has worked with these systems knows that a statewide system, regardless of which state you're talking about, cannot possibly get one up and running for the kind of money they're talking about.
We're not talking about putting a new emergency radio system in place on top of MSHP's radio system! They NEED their own radio system. This will have to be a separate entity and a system which can be accessed throughout the state by all cities and counties...the whole point of an emergency radio system!
So I don't know what they're going to do. All I do know is that $87 million isn't going to pay for it. And I'll be very interested in seeing where this stands a year from now.
 

shelleys1

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
173
Location
Ballwin, MO - We are moving to Austin, TX 1 Mar. 2
Any new info on the new emergency radio system?

Nothing at all. I really don't understand the basic concept of the system itself. If this is coined as a new Missouri emergency radio system then why is the focus on replacing all of the MSHP equipment? Yes, our HP badly needs a totally new radio system but that is *not* a state emergency radio system! That would be a Missouri State Highway Patrol Radio system.

One other thing which is going on and could be the reason why nothing has moved forward (regardless of what purpose the radio system is actually going to serve) is because the (outrageous) Tyco Electronics, one of the bidders on this system, has protested Motorola being chosen as the winning bidder! Now Tyco, a company with, IMHO, a lousy track record on design and implementation of government radio systems, has said that Motorola's bid was higher but Blunt still passed them over before leaving office and awarded the contract to Motorola.

Tyco's bid very well might have been lower than Moto's. Tyco has done some things in the past which I, along with others, consider to be pretty scary!... But before getting to that, an item which bears serious consideration (and something I've been trying to point out here) is the following:

A 2007 analysis by L. Robert Kimball and Associates, an Ebensburg, Pa.-based architectural and engineering firm, estimated it would cost Missouri between $165 million and $226 million to install up to 150 transmission towers around the state, buy 2,000 patrol radios and 54 dispatch consoles, and make sure the network is connected.

Knowing what I do about statewide radio systems, this is exactly the point I've been trying to make. And this estimate was from TWO YEARS AGO! This was an honest, straightforward estimate - quite rare these days.

Back to Tyco - Pennsylvania's experience with Tyco: Pennsylvania accepted Tyco's bid of a $179 million dollar radio system. It grew to nearly $300 million. It was supposed to be fully deployed in 2001 - thats yet to happen. Tyco is using a transmission format that is patented. This means replcement radios and equipment cannot go out on bid. It also means equipment must be purchased from Tyco or it won't work! The format is called "Open Sky". Hmmm (Yes, Motorola systems use Motorla radios but you can buy Moto radios from hundreds, if not thousands, of different sources! And once your radio system is installed, your own people can be taught to made adjustments or an outside vendor can also. You are not required to have Motorola do the work!)

There are those who claim the Tyco system works just fine. That Pennsylvania is happy with the system. Personally, I've heard many more people who hate it, detest the proprietary nature of the equipment, the structure and the system itself.

I also know Motorola systems extremely well. I'm familiar with the longevity of the equipment and the systems themselves. It's NOT a closed architecture...it has if not THE longest, certainly one of the top two or three track records in the industry. Finally, when both the buyer and Motorola work together to build the system, the longevity and integrity of the system is top grade!

Being the "low bidder" isn't always (and more often than not shouldn't be) the single determining factor in the bidding process! There are several very important considerations which have to be part of the bid as well. This, I believe, is also (and I certainly hope IS) what is slowing down the process here! Missouri doesn't have the monies needed to build the emergency radio system it truly needs. But hopefully Motorola can give them something much better than what they're working with right now.

Sorry - I didn't mean to ramble! But I'd just remembered about the stink Tyco had raised, etc. and thought that some of it could possibly be slowing down the process. Regardless, the proposed budget now on the table cannot possibly build a viable emergency radio system for Missouri - it will take 2-3 times that much, a minimum.
 
Last edited:
N

N_Jay

Guest
Nothing at all. I really don't understand the basic concept of the system itself. If this is coined as a new Missouri emergency radio system then why is the focus on replacing all of the MSHP equipment? Yes, our HP badly needs a totally new radio system but that is *not* a state emergency radio system! That would be a Missouri State Highway Patrol Radio system.
Could it be that the “Missouri emergency radio system” is the name for a unified radio system to support MSHP and others?
A 2007 analysis by L. Robert Kimball and Associates, an Ebensburg, Pa.-based architectural and engineering firm, estimated it would cost Missouri between $165 million and $226 million to install up to 150 transmission towers around the state, buy 2,000 patrol radios and 54 dispatch consoles, and make sure the network is connected.
Knowing what I do about statewide radio systems, this is exactly the point I've been trying to make. And this estimate was from TWO YEARS AGO! This was an honest, straightforward estimate - quite rare these days.
How are you so sure? (not saying it was or was not)
Why is it so rare? Do you have examples of others that were not honest and straightforward?
Back to Tyco - Pennsylvania's experience with Tyco: Pennsylvania accepted Tyco's bid of a $179 million dollar radio system. It grew to nearly $300 million. It was supposed to be fully deployed in 2001 - thats yet to happen. Tyco is using a transmission format that is patented. This means replcement radios and equipment cannot go out on bid. It also means equipment must be purchased from Tyco or it won't work! The format is called "Open Sky". Hmmm (Yes, Motorola systems use Motorla radios but you can buy Moto radios from hundreds, if not thousands, of different sources! And once your radio system is installed, your own people can be taught to made adjustments or an outside vendor can also. You are not required to have Motorola do the work!)
At the time it was bid was even the Motorola system open P25, or was it P{25 on a SmartNet control channel?
Who else can you buy Motorola (SmartNet) radios from?
What are you basing that only M/A-COM can do work on OpenSky radios?
I also know Motorola systems extremely well. I'm familiar with the longevity of the equipment and the systems themselves. It's NOT a closed architecture...it has if not THE longest, certainly one of the top two or three track records in the industry. Finally, when both the buyer and Motorola work together to build the system, the longevity and integrity of the system is top grade!
Again, given the date of the PA bid, it probably was SmartNet and that was a fairly closed architechure.
Being the "low bidder" isn't always (and more often than not shouldn't be) the single determining factor in the bidding process! There are several very important considerations which have to be part of the bid as well. This, I believe, is also (and I certainly hope IS) what is slowing down the process here! Missouri doesn't have the monies needed to build the emergency radio system it truly needs. But hopefully Motorola can give them something much better than what they're working with right now.
Yep, any well run procurement has price, technical and other considerations weighed in their relative importance against each other.
Do you have any indication that in either PA or MS this was not the case?
 

shelleys1

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
173
Location
Ballwin, MO - We are moving to Austin, TX 1 Mar. 2
Quote: "Could it be that the “Missouri emergency radio system” is the name for a unified radio system to support MSHP and others?

I believe that originally the system *was* to be a statewide system for the MSHP and it would be inclusive of all other emergency responders. Then the estimates came in for a "complete" system which would cover the entire state (the 2007 estimate) and Missouri didn't have the current or forseeable future funding to cover such a venture. Thus I think the scope of the system had to be scaled down.
Given the current duties and (obvious) importance of the MSHP activities throughout the state, the primary objective would, one must believe, be focused on their needs now and into, at minimum, the next two decades. This would then mean a system which is designed from the ground up to be flexible enough to add first responders/emergency personnel, etc. throughout the state, when/as funds and resources become available.

Quote:
How are you so sure? (not saying it was or was not)
Why is it so rare? Do you have examples of others that were not honest and straightforward?


I will not name names or state specific instances - that could get me in the middle of a lawsuit! But if one were to ask anyone involved in bidding out large contracts like this on a regular basis or others who have previously worked for some of the companies which bid or consult on large contracts (and no longer work for them), I have no doubt they'll (privately) verify what I've said. It's a tough business and I won't go into any more details than what I've already stated.

Quote:
At the time it was bid was even the Motorola system open P25, or was it P{25 on a SmartNet control channel?
Who else can you buy Motorola (SmartNet) radios from?
What are you basing that only M/A-COM can do work on OpenSky radios?


Not sure what you're asking here. If you're asking about the estimate back in 2007, Moto had already developed the P25 system. I honestly don't remember if they had implemented, for regular use, P25 on a SmartNet control channel. If they hadn't, they were testing it and were very close.

Combining all your questions here - the main point is that a vendor such as St. Louis Electronics, here in St. Louis, can sell the Motorola radios, along with a complete system, programmed for SmartNet to say, St. Louis City PD, if St. Louis City PD has a contract with them or wants to buy the radios from them. Any vendor which has a distributor contract with Motorola can sell the radios and systems. But in PA, which has the TYCO Open Sky system, they can only buy from TYCO because the company, last time I heard (this past spring) will not allow distributors to sell and program their radios or build their systems. When that happens, there is no competition and the company completely controls all costs. That isn't good! The software is Open Sky and the radios are TYCO radios. Where, in this situation, can they ever get any kind of competitive pricing on their hardware and software? Nowhere!

Quote:
Again, given the date of the PA bid, it probably was SmartNet and that was a fairly closed architechure.

The software was not Motorola's SmartNet, it was TYCO's and is called Open Sky. It is proprietary - and yes, so is SmartNet, but Motorola will allow customers' systems personnel to manage the software internally! From what I understand, TYCO will not - but I do NOT have personal verification on that! I have only heard that the PA's systems people are not happy with the setup...that's all.

Quote:
Yep, any well run procurement has price, technical and other considerations weighed in their relative importance against each other.
Do you have any indication that in either PA or MS this was not the case?


It's MO (Missouri) and no, there do not appear to be any indications whatsoever. But TYCO, who came in with a lower bid, is of course crying "Foul" and thus significantly slowing down the process. That was one of the points I was making.
 
N

N_Jay

Guest
Quote:
How are you so sure? (not saying it was or was not)
Why is it so rare? Do you have examples of others that were not honest and straightforward?


I will not name names or state specific instances - that could get me in the middle of a lawsuit! But if one were to ask anyone involved in bidding out large contracts like this on a regular basis or others who have previously worked for some of the companies which bid or consult on large contracts (and no longer work for them), I have no doubt they'll (privately) verify what I've said. It's a tough business and I won't go into any more details than what I've already stated.
You were refering to teh LRK consultingm, and that is what I was asking about.

Combining all your questions here - the main point is that a vendor such as St. Louis Electronics, here in St. Louis, can sell the Motorola radios, along with a complete system, programmed for SmartNet to say, St. Louis City PD, if St. Louis City PD has a contract with them or wants to buy the radios from them. Any vendor which has a distributor contract with Motorola can sell the radios and systems. But in PA, which has the TYCO Open Sky system, they can only buy from TYCO because the company, last time I heard (this past spring) will not allow distributors to sell and program their radios or build their systems. When that happens, there is no competition and the company completely controls all costs. That isn't good! The software is Open Sky and the radios are TYCO radios. Where, in this situation, can they ever get any kind of competitive pricing on their hardware and software? Nowhere!.
If you think the quoptations from different Motorola shops for the same equipmnet (easpecially high end) are competative, you are mistaken.

Most either can't quote teh high end equipmnet or sell it at existing contrcat prices.

You are drawing on differences that do not really exist.

You were (or seemed) to be saying PA shoudl have gone Motorola (at least partially) because it was not proprietary. I was pointing out that AT THAT TIME, it was.

Quote:
Again, given the date of the PA bid, it probably was SmartNet and that was a fairly closed architechure.

The software was not Motorola's SmartNet, it was TYCO's and is called Open Sky. It is proprietary - and yes, so is SmartNet, but Motorola will allow customers' systems personnel to manage the software internally! From what I understand, TYCO will not - but I do NOT have personal verification on that! I have only heard that the PA's systems people are not happy with the setup...that's all.
I know what PA is, but had PA gone with Motorola it woudl have been PROPRIETARY SmartNet.

Quote:
Yep, any well run procurement has price, technical and other considerations weighed in their relative importance against each other.
Do you have any indication that in either PA or MS this was not the case?


It's MO (Missouri) and no, there do not appear to be any indications whatsoever. But TYCO, who came in with a lower bid, is of course crying "Foul" and thus significantly slowing down the process. That was one of the points I was making.
Bids are often protested.

One of teh measures of a good consultant is having bids that are never, or very rarely protested.
 

wb0wao

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
347
Location
Qulin, MO
I found this on the net - http://www.dps.mo.gov/homelandsecur...eOCt22232009InteroperabilityStephenDevine.pdf

A couple highlights:
-------
The interoperable vision is a statewide VHF trunked network with interfaces for local agencies and legacy systems to facilitate interoperability, as needed.

State of Missouri and RHSOC’’s/UASIs/UASI’’s agreed that State of Missouri would implement the documented State vision as outlined in the SCIP and the State would meet the required funding match of 20%.
--------

One question that I have, according to the presentation, Missouri only has to come up with 20% matching funds - which means that the grant pays for 80%. So, if the state is going to pay $87 million - does that mean that the system will be $400+ million???? If that is the case, then they can put up one monster of a system in the state.

Dennis
 

shelleys1

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
173
Location
Ballwin, MO - We are moving to Austin, TX 1 Mar. 2
I found this on the net - http://www.dps.mo.gov/homelandsecur...eOCt22232009InteroperabilityStephenDevine.pdf

A couple highlights:
-------
The interoperable vision is a statewide VHF trunked network with interfaces for local agencies and legacy systems to facilitate interoperability, as needed.

State of Missouri and RHSOC’’s/UASIs/UASI’’s agreed that State of Missouri would implement the documented State vision as outlined in the SCIP and the State would meet the required funding match of 20%.
--------

One question that I have, according to the presentation, Missouri only has to come up with 20% matching funds - which means that the grant pays for 80%. So, if the state is going to pay $87 million - does that mean that the system will be $400+ million???? If that is the case, then they can put up one monster of a system in the state.

Dennis

Maybe, maybe not. $100 million would be a great secure system for a large county or two these days. But for a state the size of Missouri, inclusive of a top-to-bottom new system for MSHP, first responders and emergency personnel? $400 million wouldn't make a great system statewide. Pennsylvania is at $300 million after several years with supposedly no end in sight. I'd be interested in knowing what the costs were for Starcom in Illinois or what Florida paid for their excellent system. Illinois' system probably wouldn't be a good comparison, but perhaps but Florida's might, square mileage-wise. I don't know if either state has actual numbers published on their systems but maybe they do - I haven't seen them.
 

wb0wao

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
347
Location
Qulin, MO
I don't think they are financing a top to bottom system. I think that they will put the infrastructure in place that will allow (if the agencies so desire) to connect to the system when the system goes online _or_ at a later date. They will of course fund the MSP and other applicable state agencies that will be the initial users of the system. I think that there will be some migration of local agencies to the system _if_ the agency has to get new equipment due to the 2013 narrowbanding requirement and this would necessitate the local agencies applying for grants on their own. They will of course supply a compatable radio to each EOC/911/Dispatch center (Illinois does the same thing with StarCom to agencies that are not on the system). If you assume that the above is the "plan", then I would think that they could do this for $400 million fairly easily - the Arkansas statewide system, IIRC, was around $300 million. Unless I am mistaken, StarCom is not "owned" by the state of Illinois, and the users pay a "subscription fee" for usage.

Actually, it is making more sense to me now after I looked at the presentation - the state will put the infrastructure for the MSP and other applicable state agencies at a cost of $400 million and then allow any local agency that desires to (on its own dime) to connect with it. And remember, this will not be a one-shot deal either. I can forsee some future state/local cooperation in setting up additional sites with the inevitable grant money to expand the system overall. I agree that there is no way that they could do a top to bottom system for police/fire/ems/em users all at once with the money available - but again, I don't think they are going in that direction.

Dennis
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top