Milwaukee, WI - Police are suffering from "Communication Breakdown"

[rvictor]

tencom,

I asked you in another thread whether you had any stake in the Open-Sky system and you never responded. I'll ask again. You claim to know a lot and to be an avid defender of something that seems to everyone else to be indefensible.

What's your connection to the Open-Sky system? If you have none, it should be easy enough to post a clear statement to that effect. If you have a connection, it would be nice for readers to know what it is.

Dick

[tencom]

Originally Posted by rvictor

tencom,

I asked you in another thread whether you had any stake in the Open-Sky system and you never responded. I'll ask again. You claim to know a lot and to be an avid defender of something that seems to everyone else to be indefensible.

What's your connection to the Open-Sky system? If you have none, it should be easy enough to post a clear statement to that effect. If you have a connection, it would be nice for readers to know what it is.

Dick

I have no ties in any form, with any aspect of OPEN-SKY. My only intent is to addf some levity toi the obvious bias against OPEN-SKY, as displayed by the comments of most posters.where-as what is controling the debate, is scannists see OPEN-SKY technolgy, as a threat to there Hobby mostly, because OPEN-SKY will be unavailable, to scanner listeners.

[Chauffeur6]

Originally Posted by tencom

I have no ties in any form, with any aspect of OPEN-SKY. My only intent is to addf some levity toi the obvious bias against OPEN-SKY, as displayed by the comments of most posters.where-as what is controling the debate, is scannists see OPEN-SKY technolgy, as a threat to there Hobby mostly, because OPEN-SKY will be unavailable, to scanner listeners.

The trouble is that you are completely ignoring the fact that many of us speaking out on this issue are public safety professionals, not just "scanner buffs" who are bitter we can't monitor OpenSky.

Yes, there are going to be those hobbyists who are pissed that they can't monitor OpenSky systems, and they will look for any opportunity to bash the technology without having any facts or personal experience with the technology. However, those of us who have either seen/used this technology up close and personal, or who are professional colleagues of those who have, speak out against it for much different, justified, reasons. We hold in very high regard the safety of the public we serve, as well as our own safety and the safety of our fellow public safety workers. When a system with a piss poor track record and an astronomical amount of end-user complaints of system failures is pushed down our throats, you can bet your life we are going to push right back just as hard.

There is a huge difference between accepting the fact that no technology will ever be perfect, and the fact that some technology is just not meant for certain applications. OpenSky has simply not proven itself as a viable technology for critical public safety applications, that's the bottom line. You'll be very hard pressed to find a single OpenSky system installed in a public safety application where the end-users are overall satisfied with the performance. These are not a result of growing pains, in fact the OpenSky technology is quite mature by most standards. The bottom line is that, with the availability of systems and technology that has been proven to work reliably in the critical-use public safety arena, there is no reason to play games with this OpenSky system any longer. That was exactly the message New York State sent when they terminated their $2 billion contract with M/A-COMM due to failure of the product to meet the established benchmarks.

Rather than unilaterally defend OpenSky just for the sake of playing devil's advocate, why don't you do some research on it. Talk to the guys in the street who are using the system on a daily basis and find out for yourself how the system performs outside the laboratory in the real world. Find out how many users of OpenSky are forced to maintain legacy systems because of the high rate of poor usability the OpenSky system presents. There are many articles pointing this out, you apparently just choose to ignore or gloss over them. I guess all these public safety officials using the system and speaking out against it are either liars, or bumbling fools who just can't seem to figure out how to key a mic, huh?

[Squad10]

tencom, if you are interested in reasearching what is involved in planning and implementing an interoperable radio project, visit Untitled Document it is a work in progress.

Pay particular attention to the website's Minutes. Using Google Search, you will find additional Minutes for 2009 that are not yet posted to the Website. After your research, you should better understand the points and comments others have made in this thread.

[N3IVK]

It is rather suspicious about Tencom defending the system. Granted, I don't know the guy but with overwhelming bad press, broken promises, and lies...one would think you wouldn't want to defend this system.

First of all, find a Opensky system in use now in a public safety application that....well....works. You won't find many.

Second, why has the city allowed this to go on for 6+ years ? Why hasn't somebody been lynched for this massive blunder of money wasting ? Who's at fault ? City Government ? Chief of Police ? Local vendor ?

Third, GE/Ericsson/MA/COM/Tyco/Harris would want this system to either work as promised, or suck up the loss and buy the system back to avoid bad PR. Harris is a very decent company, and I am surprised this is being allowed to go on.

Fourth, where's the local vendor in this mess ? The local vendor is the one who has to deal with their customer on a daily basis, you'd think they would be bending over backwards to make things right. Isn't this the same vendor who also sells the Kenwood line for that area ? Good to hear they got the City's back on this.

I get rather annoyed about the press spewing crap out that clogs up news outlets with stories about balloon boy, Micheal Jackson's funeral day 23 , and stuff like that, but I think in this case having the local press just grill the city about this is probably the only way to get results. After all, election time will be coming up eh ?

Most radio vendors have to obtain bid bonds, performance bonds...etc when building high dollar , large systems. I would assume the City of Milwaukee did this....right ?

I can say this with confidence as I too build radio systems, no matter who makes it, or how well you plan ahead, plot, or design, you will never please everybody. You could have a radio system what has 110% coverage, sounds like a broadcast FM station, 1,000 channels, and you will never please everybody. Somebody won't like it. If the system meets the spec of that the consultant or customer wanted, those who don't like it , are just nit picking because of somebody they don't like or politics.

With that said, the City or Milwaukee OpenSky system doesn't meet any of the above. More officers don't like it than like it, the money wasted on it is biblical, since 2003 the manufacture has changed hands how many times ? Yea, it's a fail.



Matt
N3IVK

[justice1776]

I think the taxpayers need to be aware of the true issues with digital systems.

Daryl Jones' Weblog

http://blog.tcomeng.com/index.php/20...radio-systems/

[tencom]

I am the only Poster on this thread who has no axe to grind that makes me more objective since I have
no stake in the outcome.. Lets take a survey with this question

AS SCANNER LISTENERS, BY WHAT DATE DO YOU EXPECT MILWAUKEE TO SCRAP THE OPEN-SKY COMMUNICATION SYSTEM?

[Chauffeur6]

Originally Posted by tencom

I am the only Poster on this thread who has no axe to grind that makes me more objective since I have
no stake in the outcome.. Lets take a survey with this question

AS SCANNER LISTENERS, BY WHAT DATE TO YOI EXPECT MILWAUKEE TO SCRAP THE OPEN-SKY COMMUNICATION SYSTEM?

I believe the word you were looking for is "ignorant", not "objective".

You just don't get it, clearly. You are defending a system you know absolutely nothing about, and have zero experience with. You continue to claim that the only reason people are speaking out against this system is because they are bitter scanner users, thus completely ignoring the testimony of public safety officials who have had to deal with this system on a firsthand basis. In your little world, if the system fails when a cop or firefighter tries to use it, and they speak out against it because they are concerned for their safety, that just makes them completely biased and gives them an ax to grind. Did you ever stop to think that maybe the system really is crap, and all these different and unrelated users of it are on to something? Or is it just a giant nationwide conspiracy of OpenSky users who have invested hundreds of millions of dollars, countless years, and of course all the blood, sweat and tears trying to get these systems working properly? According to your posts, that must be it.

For the record, I find it quite implausible that you have absolutely no stake in OpenSky, as you claim. Nearly every post you've ever made on this board have been about and/or in defense of the system. Coincidence? You just happened to decide one morning that you thought OpenSky was getting an unfair reputation around here, and you were going to come to its defense for no particular reason? Sure.

[Squad10]

Originally Posted by N3IVK

Most radio vendors have to obtain bid bonds, performance bonds...etc when building high dollar , large systems. I would assume the City of Milwaukee did this....right ?

I did a quick search, there's little City of Milwaukee generated documents about the OpenSky radio system.

Anybody know the source(s) for the digital system funding? Federal, State?

[JGP]

Originally Posted by tencom

I am the only Poster on this thread who has no axe to grind that makes me more objective since I have
no stake in the outcome.. Lets take a survey with this question

AS SCANNER LISTENERS, BY WHAT DATE DO YOU EXPECT MILWAUKEE TO SCRAP THE OPEN-SKY COMMUNICATION SYSTEM?

Your question is like asking,"How long do you expect to live?" No one knows for sure. You need to ask the person in charge of the system to get an answer to your question.

[N_Jay]

Originally Posted by justice1776

I think the taxpayers need to be aware of the true issues with digital systems.

Daryl Jones' Weblog

Problems with OpenSky digital trunked radio systems | Daryl Jones' Weblog

What a great idea, but I would ABSOLUTELY not use Daryl Jones as a source.

That would be like using ACORN to decide who you should vote for.

[N_Jay]

Originally Posted by tencom

I am the only Poster on this thread who has no axe to grind

Say who?

You?

[KG4WHM]

Originally Posted by N3IVK

Fourth, where's the local vendor in this mess ?

I believe it is General Communications, Milwaukee shop.
I talked to two radio techs about a year ago and they said the system had the same problems as any P25 system. This radio system worked fine.

[Squad10]

A multimillion puff of smoke? Possible resulting in?:

[mkescan]

Originally Posted by Squad10

I did a quick search, there's little City of Milwaukee generated documents about the OpenSky radio system.

Anybody know the source(s) for the digital system funding? Federal, State?

I remember it was a Federal Grant that Senator Herb Kohl & Congressman Tom Barrett got for Milwaukee.
Tom Barrett.is now the Mayor of Milwaukee.

[Squad10]

Originally Posted by mkescan

I remember it was a Federal Grant that Senator Herb Kohl & Congressman Tom Barrett got for Milwaukee.
Tom Barrett.is now the Mayor of Milwaukee.

Thank you.

[tencom]

Milwaukee's OPEN-SKY communication system was financed through a grand from a "FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY" I had studied the background of this Appropriation and am knowlegable enough, and kept abreast of developments, since it's infancy of Milwaukee OPEN-SKY, and familiar enough with the involved technolgy, of this communication system as not to be treated so lightly as to be afforded a cordial response, from others escpecially, on this thread. I May be all wet as some believe, but in the end most likely my point of view will prevail..

[Squad10]

Originally Posted by tencom

Milwaukee's OPEN-SKY communication system was financed through a grand from a "FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY" I had studied the background of this Appropriation and am knowlegable enough, and kept abreast of developments, since it's infancy of Milwaukee OPEN-SKY, and familiar enough with the involved technolgy, of this communication system as not to be treated so lightly as to be afforded a cordial response, from others escpecially, on this thread. I May be all wet as some believe, but in the end most likely my point of view will prevail..

Thank you.

[KG4WHM]

Originally Posted by tencom

Milwaukee's OPEN-SKY communication system was financed through a grand from a "FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY" I had studied the background of this Appropriation and am knowlegable enough, and kept abreast of developments, since it's infancy of Milwaukee OPEN-SKY, and familiar enough with the involved technolgy, of this communication system as not to be treated so lightly as to be afforded a cordial response, from others escpecially, on this thread. I May be all wet as some believe, but in the end most likely my point of view will prevail..

You have nothing to do with this system or other CLOUDY-SKY systems? With this post it seems you do have something riding on the outcome of this or other CLOUDY-SKY systems.

[riccom]

I have been sitting here and looking at this thread for a few hour's and Note we forgot 2 things.

#1 this system was made for a shipping company,Really not for LEO use at all.

#2 with a TDMA set up for clear voice communication, like all digital, there is some drawbacks, like Buildings and what nots, now granted that i am not a fan of open-sky, i will say this!

If it works, for them good use it go for it, i will find other things to listen to, but when its not working, its not only my right to say fix it cause i help pay for it, but its the best interest in firefighting and public safety and the safety of the officers, there has no need for down time!

No all radios are perfect, never will be, but has to have a damn good 98% or better coverage,(personal thought on this ) and if edacs is not gonna be going on the wayside now with harris, i know of several agencies who use this system thats going to be very very mad!

But Open-sky has faild time and time again, its good for a small area network, like any cell phone (really thats what this is based off of!) and multi-path singlualr frequency use(i made it up i know) for data and voice on one channel!

sounds good right, well it could be, but if i was mpd, i rather to tetra really, seem more reliable then open sky!

my 2.5 cents in this!