Questions about 700 MHz radio systems

[fao110]

My county will be going to a 700 MHz radio system in the near future. We operate on vhf hi-band at the moment and the powers that be are convinced that vhf is obsolete.
Is 700 MHz a reliable system?
And what is the cost of the equipment?

Thanks

 

[W7FDX]

VHF is far from being obsolete. As far as 700mhz being a reliable it depends on what kind of system they are moving to and the terrain of the area. 700 is very line of sight meaning that there has to be a clear view from the transmitting radio to the tower. So if your county is has alot of hills and rough terrain it will require more tower sites to get the same coverage you are currently getting on vhf. As far as cost of equipment depends on if they are going P25 Phase 1 or Phase 2, Phase 2 capable equipment is significantly more expensive.

 

[zz0468]

...the powers that be are convinced that vhf is obsolete.

Vhf frequencies aren't obsolete, but much of the equipment is.

Is 700 MHz a reliable system?

Yes. If it's been designed right.

And what is the cost of the equipment?

It depends on how much you buy.

 

[fao110]

The infrastructure needs to be upgraded and the repeaters replaced with a couple of more repeater/voter sites put in.
Also the CAD system needs to be replaced.

I voiced my opinion when this was in the beginning stages but the die was already cast and the decision made that vhf was usless.

I am not sure if its going to be phase I or II. but the systems going to P25 capable. I know its required to be if grant money pays for it but I'm not clear who we are going to be talking to outside of our county.
I have very little knowledge of this system. I checked around a bit a while back but I did not have much luck on finding any info. on the system.

Neighboring counties we work with use 800 MHz EDACS or 150 MHz.
I will have to do some checking but I dont believe anyone in our area is on 700 MHz.

Its going to be interesting how ever it turns out.

 

[W7FDX]

Would you be able to tell us what county you are in?

 

[fao110]

Henderson Ky

 

[W7FDX]

Is it just going to be Henderson County going or are the neighboring counties planning on switching as well? If it is just Henderson County then you are also going to run into interop problems communicating with mutual aide departments. But then again since most surrounding counties are vhf as well then mabie they will keep some vhf channels for mutual aide?

 

[rapidcharger]

But then again since most surrounding counties are vhf as well then mabie they will keep some vhf channels for mutual aide?

Based on past case studies, what is more likely to occur is that the neighboring jurisdictions will also soon migrate over to a race-to-waste system in 700 for interoperability rather than the lone duck who didn't want to stay in the pond maintaining VHF to talk to anyone else. That's usually how that goes down, even with small population centers in broke states like mine.

 

[rapidcharger]

My county will be going to a 700 MHz radio system in the near future. We operate on vhf hi-band at the moment and the powers that be are convinced that vhf is obsolete. )))

The powers that be are typically only presented one side from which to make a decision. They don't really know and while it's likely that it's not obsolete, they don't bother to find out or ask any questions such as "If it's obsolete, why is it working so well?" or "Why has it worked so well for so long?" or "Why is it working for neighboring cities and towns as well as much larger agencies elsewhere in the country?"

(((Is 700 MHz a reliable system?)))

It requires a lot more infrastructure that has many more opportunities for failure and if it's poorly designed or implemented, which is often the case, then you can see many instances of the first responders being extremely dissatisfied where their new radio system.

Here is a recent example...
http://forums.radioreference.com/co...m-creates-fuzzy-situation-first-responde.html

(((And what is the cost of the equipment?)))

They typically ring in at around $72- $90 per capita. While it probably seems a little unusual to estimate the cost of something per capita, it's a rather uncanny coincidence perhaps that the average price for a race to waste system is about $72 per every last man, woman and child in the county. Feel free to check my math if anyone doesn't agree with it. In a super small population municipality like henderson county, it's possible the price tag will most likely be a lot higher considering the size and terrain and all the towers that will be needed to provide body worn, in-building [theoretical] coverage for the entire county. So I would guesstimate that the initial price tag (that's important because there are always costly upgrades to make later down the road) will come in at MIMIMUM $3.3 -4.2 million. And again, considering the size and challenges of covering that large county, I would not be surprised if it was even higher.

A good question to also ask is how is it going to be funded.
For a while there were a lot of federal government grants to pay for a lot of these race-to-waste systems. But also a lot of times it also involves tax increases or special assessments. Sometimes it's from bonds. Either way, it's one of those things I would keep a close eye on if you are a taxpayer in that county.

 

[fao110]

Im not sure how its going to be funded but they are prepared to spend many dollars for the new system.

And they are paying a consultant company to tell them what they need. I just hope that they follow the engineers recommendations and not cut corners.

My major concern is the complexity of the system and how long its going to be down when it fails and how complicated the radios will be to use in the field.

Like I said before its going to be interesting.

 

[rapidcharger]

And they are paying a consultant company to tell them what they need. I just hope that they follow the engineers recommendations and not cut corners.)))

Hiring a consultant sounds like a good idea but It's problematic when the consultants are former (or future) employees of the companies that supply the hardware, which is often the case. They recommend things that will benefit the manufacturer (e.g. motorola) more than it will benefit anyone else. So be careful what you wish for.

(((My major concern is the complexity of the system and how long its going to be down when it fails and how complicated the radios will be to use in the field.)))

That is a valid concern and one I would have myself. Unlike the analog conventional systems of yore that were simple enough for a local radio tech or local dealer or even in house radio tech to troubleshoot, these new systems often require flying in techs from out of state and the timeline for providing emergency service is stipulated in the contract. So you can find out ahead of time what that window is by reading the proposals. The subscriber units themselves have a lot of features that probably will never be used but training should be provided on how to use them. I would question when and where that training will be provided.

(((Like I said before its going to be interesting.

"Interesting" isn't really the word I would use. I would use the word "painful".
And if you are that concerned about the reliability of any proposed new system, as you should be, I would encourage you to get involved by requesting and reading the proposals and anything the consultants come back with and voice your concerns to the elected body of people who will no doubt be more persuaded by what they hear on the golf course rather than common sense. A lot of race-to-waste radio systems were rushed through to get the deal done and as a result they are unreliable. One local agency bought one about a year ago (that cost $4 million) that they didn't even bother to get licensed for and the first responders that use it complain endlessly about the dead zones. So now they're going to more than likely shell out another several million dollars to buy something else that will probably be equally as pointless as the one before it.

 

[12dbsinad]

"VHF is obsolete" LOL. It's clear here that someone is getting filled with a load of BS. A few areas around me that are on 800/700 are installing "VHF overlay zones in the mountains" because it's the only thing that works. So what makes it obsolete again?

To the OP, get involved! Bring facts to the table. Good luck.

 

[SCPD]

Reasons to not get high

A couple of comments

1. Before you write off the current VHF repeaters for being obsolete, swap out the antennas and feedline. More than likely, you've been using the same coax since the repeaters went up. Any ham will tell you that you should swap your coax out every 10 years or so, Old coax leaks rf like a soaker hose leaks water. Borrow the fire department's hook and ladder truck and put up new coax and antennas, and see how your signal jumps.

2. Looking at Google Maps, it looks like you got some hills and valleys in your county. So like previous posts have said, 700/800 does not
play well in rolling terrain. I'll take an educated guess that Motorola isn't a prospective vendor. They are smart enough to pick their battles, and getting 700/800 to work well in the hollers is a big headache.

Nothing wrong with bringing in a new system. Digital goes further on the same frequency. And you can do a lot with the data side of a digital system. I woujld strongly urge you to try and keep it down on VHF though. Get the first responders on your side, talk about safety, and all that. There's examples all over RR of spotty UHF and 800 coverage in the Appalachians.

 

[rapidcharger]

"VHF is obsolete" LOL. It's clear here that someone is getting filled with a load of BS. A few areas around me that are on 800/700 are installing "VHF overlay zones in the mountains" because it's the only thing that works. So what makes it obsolete again?

To the OP, get involved! Bring facts to the table. Good luck.

VHF or analog conventional is certainly not obsolete but what gets taken out of context in the various articles is that certain hardware used for linking sites and remote receivers is supposedly getting more difficult, if not impossible to source. Of course I would argue that for what they are paying for these race-to-waste systems, they could open an entire factory to manufacture the hardware. Not to mention, if there was a demand for it, it would be available.

Also, with the narrowbanding mandate, coverage has been decreased for many agencies once they go narrow. Of course that doesn't mean that a DTRS is needed. Just that they are only getting one side of the facts. That side is from the vendors.

2. Looking at Google Maps, it looks like you got some hills and valleys in your county. So like previous posts have said, 700/800 does not
play well in rolling terrain. I'll take an educated guess that Motorola isn't a prospective vendor. They are smart enough to pick their battles, and getting 700/800 to work well in the hollers is a big headache..

If Motorola is smart enough to pick their battles when it comes to terrain, I haven't noticed. They will sell 7/800 mhz race-to-waste radio systems to anyone who is dumb enough to sign on the line.
Just look at this egregious example VIPER Statewide P25 Trunking System, Varies, North Carolina - Scanner Frequencies
and this one too Rome / Floyd County Public Safety Trunking System, Rome, Georgia - Scanner Frequencies

Those places make the OP's terrain look like a panacake.

And I don't necessarily disagree on the choice to go with VHF however in places where the radio system hasn't been upgraded in 30 years due to not having money or not having an excuse to do it, a lot has changed in that 30 years. They may now find themselves with subdivisions and buildings and a lot more sources of noise that can negatively impact VHF. Granted, that's probably not the case with the OP's county. The commonly used excuse that "body-worn, in-building portable coverage is needed" because for some reason pulling a radio off your belt like nearly everyone did up until about 15-20 years ago or wearing one on your shoulder like they do in nearly every other country on Earth is not an acceptable option to them. And regardless of whether there is any need for it or any buildings, they are oversold a digital network that offers such coverage. Just look at the Viper system. That's covering the Appalachian mountains in Western North Carolina, most of which I can't even maintain a usable Verizon cell phone signal. All so some super small town cops can have body worn portable coverage in a sparsely populated area. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. That is not spending taxpayer dollars wisely.

 

[PhillyPhoto]

As far as coverage, see if you can get radios with both VHF and 7/800 in them (most have at least 2 bands available nowadays). Then just keep renewing the VHF channels as a backup, and when (not if) your system goes down, you'll be back in business in seconds switching to the VHF bank. And like Wyandotte said, replace the older coax and antennas and you'll be good to go.

They typically ring in at around $72- $90 per capita. ... So I would guesstimate that the initial price tag (that's important because there are always costly upgrades to make later down the road) will come in at MIMIMUM $3.3 -4.2 million.

$72-90 is nothing for a town near me looking to upgrade. Instead of being smart and coordinating a county-wide system, they're upgrading their legacy SmartNet system (like a lot of towns around here). Harris has bid at $3.5M and with a population of around 26,000, it works out to around $133/person. Talk about wasting tax-payer dollars.

 

[rapidcharger]

$72-90 is nothing for a town near me looking to upgrade. Instead of being smart and coordinating a county-wide system, they're upgrading their legacy SmartNet system (like a lot of towns around here). Harris has bid at $3.5M and with a population of around 26,000, it works out to around $133/person. Talk about wasting tax-payer dollars.

It also begs the question, why the heck does a town with only 26,000 people need a trunking system to begin with? I can't understand why they would have all that many users or have a need for so many talk groups.. They don't need a "system".... they need a repeater. And maybe not even that. Reusing frequencies is a common excuse given but a town that would otherwise use one or two frequencies is now going to have 5 or more additional. Way to conserve spectrum.

 

[R8000]

Be careful who you get "expert" advice from on these forums. Just because a person can create an account, rack up a post count and use big words doesn't mean he's qualified to engineer public safety radio systems.

Most of the folks here have never been involved on what happens on the transmitter side of things and only run their mouth to improve their ego. They may attend a public meeting and think they are qualified to answer everybody's communications needs, even though they don't know anything about it.

When a RR user posts nothing but anti-government, "corrupt this and corrupt that" and other things of the sort it sets off a red flag to me. Makes me wonder they they even are on the site.

Just be careful who you consider to be "experts" on here, you may be getting bad information.

 

[JoeyC]

Be careful who you get "expert" advice from on these forums. Just because a person can create an account, rack up a post count and use big words doesn't mean he's qualified to engineer public safety radio systems.

Most of the folks here have never been involved on what happens on the transmitter side of things and only run their mouth to improve their ego. They may attend a public meeting and think they are qualified to answer everybody's communications needs, even though they don't know anything about it.

When a RR user posts nothing but anti-government, "corrupt this and corrupt that" and other things of the sort it sets off a red flag to me. Makes me wonder they they even are on the site.

Just be careful who you consider to be "experts" on here, you may be getting bad information.

Very very sound advice. He who is most vocal about these topics is usually the least qualified to comment.

 

[PhillyPhoto]

Very very sound advice. He who is most vocal about these topics is usually the least qualified to comment.

But who's to say he's the expert on telling me who to listen to or not? It's a self-defeating argument!

 

[PhillyPhoto]

It also begs the question, why the heck does a town with only 26,000 people need a trunking system to begin with? I can't understand why they would have all that many users or have a need for so many talk groups.. They don't need a "system".... they need a repeater. And maybe not even that. Reusing frequencies is a common excuse given but a town that would otherwise use one or two frequencies is now going to have 5 or more additional. Way to conserve spectrum.

They probably had some slick sales agent back in the day sell them the first system. I live in a town about twice the size and PD & FD have 2 channels each and I'm sure DPW has their own channel. All conventional & analog and they work great, and are a lot busier than this little town.