Ridgewood,NJ--Radio upgrades are questioned

Status
Not open for further replies.

rapidcharger

Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
2,382
Location
The land of broken calculators.
It's great to hear of participation and transparency in the process. Hopefully they get those additional proposals the residents want to see.

New Jersey of all places...

Democracy is not a spectator sport.
 

902

Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2003
Messages
2,620
Location
Downsouthsomewhere
It's pretty scary when one knows most of the people in the article. Two cents time: I don't think much of the 1500 radio, but I think even less of the APX. They simply don't need it, unless they were ditching their system and going to the County. Then they could have VHF and T-Band, for as long as T-Band will be around. More importantly, they could get a better value with a third party radio that has the improved vocoder. I'm also not sure I agree with the 1 Watt makes a difference statement, as it has to be framed in context. The APX spec sheet says it can go up to 6 W in VHF. That's +37.38 dBm. The XTS1500 says it can go up to 5 W. That's +36.99 dBm. All things considered, with antenna efficiency, free space attenuation, construction materials, and many uncontrolled variables, 0.39 dBm is imperceptible. A professionally designed system would have vastly greater margins considering covered area and common practices. I agree with Gottlieb, THAT wouldn't make a difference. Of course, one might have a different nifty factor, but ??? I also agree with Tony - planning is important. It also demonstrates to what depth various options were considered. In my experience with public sector procurement, lowest bid almost never means the best deal for the public. The best policy is discarding the highest and lowest bids and evaluating the merits of the middle solutions for identified needs. But then, the article only mentions subscriber units (and portables only, at that). Who knows what else went into this sausage. Maybe the most responsible thing they could have done is start the seed for a transition from T-Band to 700 and use the County's site controller for interconnection and interoperability between disparate band trunked and conventional. Sooner or later... at least right now.
 

cifd64

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
610
Location
Northern Passaic County, NJ
They want it because others are getting them. Ridgewood is a NOT in an area prone to terrorism or massive interagency operations. It is wasteful and disgusting.
 

radionerd13669

Useless Contributor
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
368
Location
Northern,New York
A little confused. Clicked on the article and is was from Aug of 2012. I would image they have figured out a plan by now since they had till Jan 1 2013
 

Wilrobnson

Moderately Active Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2002
Messages
1,069
Location
Object-oriented
They want it because others are getting them. Ridgewood is a NOT in an area prone to terrorism or massive interagency operations. It is wasteful and disgusting.

Interesting hypothesis. Care to tell the class what, exactly, defines an area as being "prone to terrorism"?
 

W2MR

Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2004
Messages
136
The more Bergen county advances to full interoperation the further they get from it.

I'm so happy that I have nothing to do with this anymore...nothing to with this anymore.....nothing....
 
Last edited:

902

Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2003
Messages
2,620
Location
Downsouthsomewhere
The more Bergen county advances to full interoperation the further they get from it.

I'm so happy that I have nothing to do with this anymore...nothing to with this anymore.....nothing....
You're in the same boat I am :lol: Based on some of the players, "would have" factors in.
 
D

DaveNF2G

Guest
Interesting hypothesis. Care to tell the class what, exactly, defines an area as being "prone to terrorism"?

Generally speaking, only major cities with dense populations, heavy infrastructure, national landmarks, or dangerous targets (nuke plants, etc.) are "prone to terrorism" in any meaningful sense. DHS has not reported breaking up any terrorist plans against any small communities. (Small meaning unlike NYC, Los Angeles, Boston, or Chicago.)

Yet a very large fraction (most? I don't know for sure.) of "Homeland Security" grant money is going to small or out-of-the-way places that have no real need for protection against terrorism per se.

That is not to say that these agencies don't need money, but the funding should not be granted under the pretense of advancing national defenses against terrorism.
 

cifd64

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
610
Location
Northern Passaic County, NJ
And it inst only that. LE have been led to believe that they MUST have this equipment. They claim interoperability, but this is not necessary to accomplish it. They want the radios because they see others with them. It has nothing to do with interoperability, it has to do with envy. And the biggest problem i have with this is they want to give these radios to firemen, who already carry enough crap, the last thing they need are these bricks. Again, it is wasteful, and disgusting.
 

wtp

Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2008
Messages
5,914
Location
Port Charlotte FL
choice of one

ex-fire chief says bad radio, so lets not listen to him after all what does he know about money er i mean equipment. we have years of money spending so that shows we know how to spend!

do you think any council member would spend time in jail for murder if a fireman dies?
 

PJH

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
3,620
The ASTRO25 line (aka the XTS/XTL series) is essentially dead. The last date to order a XTL/XTL5000 is October 31, 2013. Currently a single band APX is the same price as a similarly configured XTL/XTS radio....but also has many more years of service life. The XTx2500/1500 hasn't had the annoucement yet but figure the first quarter 2014 it will be done as well.

So the argurement for those two radios as stated above is really mute. You want to buy an APX over an ASTRO25 radio just on the basis of life expentancy alone - should you want to stay with Motorola/feature set.
 

cifd64

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
610
Location
Northern Passaic County, NJ
But the HT isn't. The argument I made was about firefighters carrying the APX/XTS over an HT. I will tell you, lighter is better. The other argument made was about purchasing these radios under the guise of homeland security. If they had just said "this is where the technology is going" fine.
 

PJH

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
3,620
APX/XTS over an HT

Huh?

You do realize that a radio that is no longer supported doesn't help you in any role when its not working...

I've carried the XTS, APX and HT1250 in firefighting and other roles, and I find no real gear or weight issues - especially when using radio straps properly. The size difference between a standard APX7000 and an XTS is negligable and for a "HT" that term is too generic as I don't see a model number. HT600, HT1000, HT750.... all different.

I personally use a APX7000XE with the FF mic and love it...in a radio strap and for carry in the holder. I find it no different than any other radio. Lighter might be better, but a functioning radio in a hazardous/high heat enviroment is supreme.
 

Wilrobnson

Moderately Active Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2002
Messages
1,069
Location
Object-oriented
Generally speaking, only major cities with dense populations, heavy infrastructure, national landmarks, or dangerous targets (nuke plants, etc.) are "prone to terrorism" in any meaningful sense. DHS has not reported breaking up any terrorist plans against any small communities. (Small meaning unlike NYC, Los Angeles, Boston, or Chicago.)

Yet a very large fraction (most? I don't know for sure.) of "Homeland Security" grant money is going to small or out-of-the-way places that have no real need for protection against terrorism per se.

That is not to say that these agencies don't need money, but the funding should not be granted under the pretense of advancing national defenses against terrorism.

I actually would love to debate this (my phone added "to death" after "debate this" LOL), but this probably isn't the best thread for it. Also, I'm only posting on here via phone from now on, as visiting the forums via my computer always seems to result in a Trojan virus from the ads lately.

Suffice it to say, it's been my experience over the years, both pre- and post- 9/11, that those definitions of terrorism prone areas that you mentioned are not accurate about 50% of the time.
 
D

DaveNF2G

Guest
Suffice it to say, it's been my experience over the years, both pre- and post- 9/11, that those definitions of terrorism prone areas that you mentioned are not accurate about 50% of the time.

I guess it depends on how you define "terrorism."

There has been an unfortunate trend to reclassifying all sorts of criminal behavior as "terrorism" so as to divert more funding toward suppressing it.
 

PJH

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
3,620

I have one 1250 and one 750 (same basic radio/case) that have melted nicely in a fire. The radio's when designed and marketed were not meant for public safey and especially the fire service but due to its lower cost, many safety agencies adopted it and had wide spread use.

I am not saying that its a bad radio at all - just that it was initally designed for commerical applications and had to have many firmware enhancements to make it more PS friendly.

BUT to blankely state that because dept 1 has a radio so we need that same radio would be a flawed analysis of the article and proposed soluition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top