MPSCS APCO 25 vs. Motorola Type II Smartnet

[Old4rd]

Has anyone made the observation that on the digital 800 systems you will often hear a request to "repeat your last transmission, you went digital." (In other words the last message was choppy). Here in Genesee County I monitor our APCO 25 simulcast system and the state's MPSCS system, as well as neighboring Lapeer County's Motorola Type II Smartnet analog 800 system. On Lapeer's system I rarely hear a poor quality signal, or a Lapeer County user asking their unit to repeat a transmission.... Granted, Genesee Co's. new system is a huge improvement over their old VHF simulcast, but I thought that one of the main selling points of these multi-million dollar digital systems was their dependability?

[Chief71]

You would not believe all the dead spots that are in the Lapeer Co. system. When we are patroling through Deerfield twp, the patrol car radio is all static when we are within a mile of the MSP tower. The reception is also horrible in the very south and very north parts of the county. Unfortunately we are not planning on upgrading or modifing the system anytime soon.

[Alpha432]

Originally Posted by Old4rd

Has anyone made the observation that on the digital 800 systems you will often hear a request to "repeat your last transmission, you went digital." (In other words the last message was choppy). Here in Genesee County I monitor our APCO 25 simulcast system and the state's MPSCS system, as well as neighboring Lapeer County's Motorola Type II Smartnet analog 800 system. On Lapeer's system I rarely hear a poor quality signal, or a Lapeer County user asking their unit to repeat a transmission.... Granted, Genesee Co's. new system is a huge improvement over their old VHF simulcast, but I thought that one of the main selling points of these multi-million dollar digital systems was their dependability?

I agree with that. The Downriver (wayne county) has the same smartzone system is outstanding. It is digitally sounding once in a while, but always clear. I can get them from upwards of 40 miles away. Not too impressed with the MPSCS. Hence Detroit. Cannot hear it if you are even if you are outside the boarders. At least that is what I have found. I worked for a department downriver for a couple of years once we first got this system, I found it not to be good indoors or in basements. It was horible in hosptials that were only a couple miles away. Could not hear dispatch calling us out for another run. The selling point for the Oakland county MA/COM system is its range and ability to recieve signals indoors. Will be interesting to see how it goes when it goes. Not holding my breath that long.

[Old4rd]

Originally Posted by Chief_71

You would not believe all the dead spots that are in the Lapeer Co. system. When we are patroling through Deerfield twp, the patrol car radio is all static when we are within a mile of the MSP tower. The reception is also horrible in the very south and very north parts of the county. Unfortunately we are not planning on upgrading or modifing the system anytime soon.

Interesting first-hand insight. It would be nice to hear from any Genesee Co. users for comments on their system..... As for Lapeer County upgrading their system; this link (http://www.radioreference.com/module...e=TRSDB&sid=93) to Lapeer's trunking info. says they are planning to upgrade by late '06. ???

[MacombMonitor]

I hear that quite often on MPSCS. What's scary is it only needs to happen one time to cost someone their life!

[Chief71]

Originally Posted by Old4rd

Interesting first-hand insight. It would be nice to hear from any Genesee Co. users for comments on their system..... As for Lapeer County upgrading their system; this link (http://www.radioreference.com/module...e=TRSDB&sid=93) to Lapeer's trunking info. says they are planning to upgrade by late '06. ???

I don't know where the info about Lapeer Co upgrading came from. I've talked to our dispatchers and they said they aren't planning on changing anything anytime soon. We also haven't been told anything like that in the Sheriff's Dept either.

[wa8pyr]

Originally Posted by Old4rd

Has anyone made the observation that on the digital 800 systems you will often hear a request to "repeat your last transmission, you went digital." (In other words the last message was choppy). Here in Genesee County I monitor our APCO 25 simulcast system and the state's MPSCS system, as well as neighboring Lapeer County's Motorola Type II Smartnet analog 800 system. On Lapeer's system I rarely hear a poor quality signal, or a Lapeer County user asking their unit to repeat a transmission.... Granted, Genesee Co's. new system is a huge improvement over their old VHF simulcast, but I thought that one of the main selling points of these multi-million dollar digital systems was their dependability?

Keep in mind that many of these statewide systems (like MARCS in Ohio and MPSCS in Michigan) are designed primarily for mobile radio coverage, not portable. MARCS is designed for 97% in-street mobile coverage statewide, except in Columbus (the state capital) where it's designed for 97% in-building portable coverage; a few other major cities are designed for 97% in-street portable coverage. I suspect MPSCS is similarly designed, with in-building portable coverage in Lansing and in-street portable coverage in a few other semi-important cities.

So, in areas which are only designed for mobile coverage and where local agencies have signed on, you'll get the "going digital" (I love that description) business frequently, when users try to communicate from within a building or down over a hill.

Tom WA8PYR

[rdale]

Actually they did not guarantee in-building portable coverage to be better in any particular area - which is why the city of Lansing is leaving MPSCS.

[n8chb]

[QUOTE=wa8pyr

"going digital" (I love that description)
Tom WA8PYR[/QUOTE]

-------------------------------

Me too and the 73's "best wishes best wishes" one also.

Since the mpscs system has been up and running I notice very little repeating of messages.
My experience tells me that new equipment is generally not accepted well at first
and often incorrectly compared to what it replaced.

Digital conversion of analog is far superior and trouble free than (the old Way) actually not
old because it all stated with CW code and tones by Morse and Baudot.

The new digital systems are back to the future technology. hi hi

About portable radio equipment. Hand held radio's have a purpose but do not operate the same nor can they be used to replace fixed or mobile types.

Cell phone are a good example of a lot of confusion. Cell companies have to spend millions of dollars flooding populated areas with of antennas because of the limited distance of a hand held phone used in RF shielded vehicles and buildings with no external antenna.

73,


Roger Breckon - n8chb

[rdale]

"My experience tells me that new equipment is generally not accepted well at first"

It's not the equipment always (although Motorola did send defective batteries when Lansing started which made things worse) but usually coverage. Still have several parts of Lansing where "you are digital, please repeat" is a guarantee for a fire run.

[Mac2]

I am on the far west side of Genesee Co. using BCD396T with v1.07 software.

My radio is able to hear several 800 MHz digital systems. One needs to read the display. Today, I have had it using the Owosso system. Genesee dispach (North, South, and Fire) are there as well as MSP for District 1 and even some District 2. Have even heard Clinton Co. and cars that say they are in Lansing. Wish that I had two radios and could run them on different systems to get a better idea of what IDs are on both Owosso and Genesee system.

It may be that Genesee dispatch signals are better (less distorted) using the Owosso system than the same signals when using the Genesee system.

Just a point of reference.

Mac

[rdale]

"It may be that Genesee dispatch signals are better (less distorted) using the Owosso system than the same signals when using the Genesee system."

That is the case for scanner users, however not all of the TAC / proprietary channels are carried outside the simulcast zone.

[Thunderbolt]

Originally Posted by Chief_71

I don't know where the info about Lapeer Co upgrading came from. I've talked to our dispatchers and they said they aren't planning on changing anything anytime soon. We also haven't been told anything like that in the Sheriff's Dept either.

The person who submitted that information was from a Lapeer County Government agency. He advised that the county had applied for a federal grant in 2004 to help offset the costs of making the changeover to a true P-25 TRS. That said, Lapeer County must not have received the aforementioned grant and currently have no plans to upgrade to the MPSCS?

From the sounds of it, neighboring St. Clair County will probably be on the MPSCS before Lapeer County makes the switch.

73's

Ron

[Chief71]

Originally Posted by Thunderbolt

The person who submitted that information was from a Lapeer County Government agency. He advised that the county had applied for a federal grant in 2004 to help offset the costs of making the changeover to a true P-25 TRS. That said, Lapeer County must not have received the aforementioned grant and currently have no plans to upgrade to the MPSCS?

From the sounds of it, neighboring St. Clair County will probably be on the MPSCS before Lapeer County makes the switch.

73's

Ron

Ok, when it comes to us getting grants in Lapeer it does take a while.

[EC-7]

When they built the systems, they also designed them to be used with 5db gain antenna on the cars, but a lot of departments are going towards the more "stealth" antennas like the Phantom's and they are a lot shorter and dont have any gain, and dont radiate as good as a 1/4 wave or gain antenna. With a Phantom antenna being 1.75" tall vs a 5db antenna being about 8-10" tall, that make a big difference in getting over obstructions, even other vans, SUV's buildings etc on 800Mhz. They might as well put on crappy rubber ducky antennas.

[Old4rd]

Originally Posted by wa8pyr

Keep in mind that many of these statewide systems (like MARCS in Ohio and MPSCS in Michigan) are designed primarily for mobile radio coverage, not portable. MARCS is designed for 97% in-street mobile coverage statewide, except in Columbus (the state capital) where it's designed for 97% in-building portable coverage; a few other major cities are designed for 97% in-street portable coverage. I suspect MPSCS is similarly designed, with in-building portable coverage in Lansing and in-street portable coverage in a few other semi-important cities.

So, in areas which are only designed for mobile coverage and where local agencies have signed on, you'll get the "going digital" (I love that description) business frequently, when users try to communicate from within a building or down over a hill.

Tom WA8PYR

Genesee Co's system was designed for 95% in-building coverage.Here is Motorola's press release announcing the contract: http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/...004_23,00.html. There are six towers in the county and a MPSCS tower in each of four surrounding counties all simulcasting Genesee's system. A Lt. in an area fire dept. that I know told me about the demos that Motorola put on, demonstrating the performance of handhelds with this new technology. As a taxpayer in this county of a few rolling hills and the majority of it being suburbia & open land; and, believing that Motorola really has their "sales pitch" polished when presenting their product to our public officials, I can't help but wonder why I hear so often the request to "repeat your last, you were digital". I cannot speak for the users of this sytem and their satisfaction with it, but it seems like I hear that request to "repeat" all too often. But if they're happy.... I'm happy. It indeed is an improvement from what they had.

[bkotarsk]

Originally Posted by Old4rd

Has anyone made the observation that on the digital 800 systems you will often hear a request to "repeat your last transmission, you went digital." (In other words the last message was choppy). Here in Genesee County I monitor our APCO 25 simulcast system and the state's MPSCS system, as well as neighboring Lapeer County's Motorola Type II Smartnet analog 800 system. On Lapeer's system I rarely hear a poor quality signal, or a Lapeer County user asking their unit to repeat a transmission.... Granted, Genesee Co's. new system is a huge improvement over their old VHF simulcast, but I thought that one of the main selling points of these multi-million dollar digital systems was their dependability?

Genesee county system is REAL choppy . makes my pro 2096 USELESS

[rdale]

That's because of the scanner, not the system.

[SEMTTP]

Originally Posted by EC-7

When they built the systems, they also designed them to be used with 5db gain antenna on the cars, but a lot of departments are going towards the more "stealth" antennas like the Phantom's and they are a lot shorter and dont have any gain, and dont radiate as good as a 1/4 wave or gain antenna. With a Phantom antenna being 1.75" tall vs a 5db antenna being about 8-10" tall, that make a big difference in getting over obstructions, even other vans, SUV's buildings etc on 800Mhz. They might as well put on crappy rubber ducky antennas.

This is not true!

Go to http://www.antenex.com and you will see there that the phantom antennas do have gain, and they work much better because of their radiating pattern!!


Eric