What you think?

[AirScan1]

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski reports on the failed P25 digital radio effort | Daryl Jones' Weblog

Hey I did not make this up
but this not to cause any problems
but this what the FCC was thinking .

[kb2vxa]

The key word here is WAS, obviously scrapping viable systems for completely different technology costing untold billions went over like a lead balloon. The FCC is known for bad decisions but this goes beyond words.

Now why did you bother to post something that was born dead? Must be a proverbial slow news day.

[wingmaker]

This interesting though, Thanks for posting. I do agree with warren wont go anywhere now, but in time this is very possible LOVE AND BLESSINGS

[WayneH]

From the link: Posted in August 8th, 2010

We've discussed this before. Do we need to do this again. And do we really need more of the P25 rants from you Airscan1? You're a little late.

[Spitfire8520]

Originally Posted by WayneH

And do we really need more of the P25 rants from you Airscan1?

Yes, yes, we all know about your apparent life long devotion to hating digital. Guess what? We don't care. It's good to have opinions, but you're sounding like a broken tape player that won't stop repeating the same line over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over again.There are a lot of other people who hate digital, you don't see them posting everyday saying "digital is bad."

If you want to rant about how bad digital is, go here and no administrator or moderator will care about what you say, and you won't be banned:
Rants - The RadioReference.com Forums

[mmckenna]

I'll add to this:

I work with Daryl Jones quite a bit.

He is NOT anti-digital. He is against stupidity. Agencies blindly purchasing P25 equipment for "interoperability" is silly. The Feds requiring it for some systems is just plain idiotic. P25 has been in the works for about 25 years now, it started with APCO messed up Project 16 so bad.
The idea that P25 is the solution to interoperability is based on flawed thinking.

Digital is here to stay, but P25 is getting long in the tooth, and the replacements are already on the way.

[MtnBiker2005]

Link to the old threads:

RR thread: FCC Chairman reports on the failed P25 digital radio effort
RR thread: P25 Article. Very intersting

[RadioDaze]

I think someone has a birdie on their "P25 Rant" channel.

[Jim41]

From a scanner owners perspective:
1. Full time encryption is worse than P25.
2. Simulcast trunked systems (multiple towers, identical frequencies) are worse than P25.

We have several scanners available that can successfully receive P25. Be thankful for that!

Jim41

[wingmaker]

Originally Posted by Spitfire8520

Yes, yes, we all know about your apparent life long devotion to hating digital. Guess what? We don't care. It's good to have opinions, but you're sounding like a broken tape player that won't stop repeating the same line over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over again.There are a lot of other people who hate digital, you don't see them posting everyday saying "digital is bad."

If you want to rant about how bad digital is, go here and no administrator or moderator will care about what you say, and you won't be banned:
Rants - The RadioReference.com Forums

I wouldnt say he was ranting, He was just posting a page with info that he found, now if he didnt have a thing about Digital or P25 would he of found it, well thats another story. Also he did go to the Rants forum and got blasted there also

Originally Posted by Jim41

From a scanner owners perspective:
1. Full time encryption is worse than P25.
2. Simulcast trunked systems (multiple towers, identical frequencies) are worse than P25.

We have several scanners available that can successfully receive P25. Be thankful for that!

Jim41

I agree, I wish on all simulcast they would use different freq for each tower, or like 800 mhz and 700 mhz on simulcast systems

LOVE AND BLESSINGS AirScan1 and to ALL

[KB1UAM]

GOOD grief charlie brown!!! Here we go again.

[mancow]

Originally Posted by wingmaker

....I wish on all simulcast they would use different freq for each tower, or like 800 mhz and 700 mhz on simulcast systems

but then it wouldn't be simulcast...

[techman210]

Originally Posted by Jim41

From a scanner owners perspective:
1. Full time encryption is worse than P25.
2. Simulcast trunked systems (multiple towers, identical frequencies) are worse than P25.

We have several scanners available that can successfully receive P25. Be thankful for that!

Jim41

Jim,

You likely haven't been in areas that Simulcast (conventional or trunking) has been well-designed. I've seen several systems that work well. Most need tweaking after install, which usually isn't done.

Unfortunately the state of the radio art is that the artists - technicians and engineers - think that simulcast only comes down to audio timing and frequency accuracy. Most of the people that understand propagation and coverage overlaps are gone. So are most of the antenna manufacturers that made really good antennas with accurate gain/pattern data.

This is why there are a lot of simulcast systems sound like an old coffee grinder.

[WayneH]

This isn't suitable for GenScan anymore. And wingmaker, it's a rant when you continually bring the topic up in different threads.

[zz0468]

Originally Posted by AirScan1

What you think?

I think you need a less aggravating hobby. Seriously, have you considered stamp collecting?

[zz0468]

Originally Posted by techman210

...I've seen several systems that work well. Most need tweaking after install, which usually isn't done.

And some need almost continuous tweaking to keep sounding good. It's definitely not a "set and forget" type of operation.

Originally Posted by techman210

Unfortunately the state of the radio art is that the artists - technicians and engineers - think that simulcast only comes down to audio timing and frequency accuracy. Most of the people that understand propagation and coverage overlaps are gone. So are most of the antenna manufacturers that made really good antennas with accurate gain/pattern data.

I've done quite a bit of simulcast design and I agree with the above 100%. A good part of what's missing is antenna pattern control and ERP control. It used to be that you could download antenna patterns in electronic format to incorporate into the various software tools used for coverage prediction. Those are getting hard to find. And ERP... crank those radios to rated power! You can tune out the overlap with launch delay. Yeah, right.

It can also be quite painstaking to determine the optimum timing. Many systems I've encountered are designed with zero launch delay between sites, and a great deal of trouble is spent achieving that. But frequently, that's not what's needed.

I was troubled to find that one well known and respected antenna manufacturer doesn't even have an antenna range for testing their designs. Published data is from predictions, not measurements. And I've seen the measurements fall way short of the expectations that were sold.

Originally Posted by techman210

This is why there are a lot of simulcast systems sound like an old coffee grinder.

And the users are accustomed to it, so they don't complain.

[AirScan1]

I was just wondering about it some one had posted this in another forum.
than some one said this statment is out dated , so i'm just wondering about it.

[zz0468]

Originally Posted by AirScan1

I was just wondering about it some one had posted this in another forum.
than some one said this statment is out dated , so i'm just wondering about it.

Keep in mind that Daryl Jones' blog is just one man's opinion. While I agree with much of what he has to say, and his blog is widely read amongst engineers and technicians in the industry, I can't say as I've ever heard of it having any influence over decision makers on the verge of implementing a P25 system. I suspect that most of his readers use his blog as a validation for their own concerns. It's kind of cathartic when you have a need to say "I told you so", but political correctness and a need to continue to draw a paycheck keeps you from saying it out loud. So, Daryl Jones provides a needed service for people with a need to vent.

Problem is, when it comes to the very political climate that public safety radio has become, engineers and technicians are at the bottom of the food chain that determines what sort of system the end user will wind up with. Engineers and technicians make piss poor politicians, and it's politics that's driving this train.

The bottom line for you, AirScan1, is that P25 isn't going away anytime soon. And no one is going back to easily scanned, non-encrypted analog systems just so hobbyists can listen. The list of feature demands from police and fire users gets longer every day, and the last item on the list... the VERY last item on the list is any sort of concern that it can be listened to by the public.

Learn to adapt, or find another hobby.

[AirScan1]

true true but the cost of scanners for that system needs to go down hard.
america is still jobless,

[zz0468]

Originally Posted by AirScan1

true true but the cost of scanners for that system needs to go down hard.
america is still jobless,

Buy used if you can't afford new. There is no inherent right that scanning should be inexpensive.