RadioReference on Facebook   RadioReference on Twitter   RadioReference Blog
 

Go Back   The RadioReference.com Forums > U.S. Regional Radio Discussion Forums > Texas Radio Discussion Forum

Texas Radio Discussion Forum Forum for discussing Radio Information in the State of Texas.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #161 (permalink)  
Old 10-09-2012, 7:56 AM
mfn002's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Bryan, Texas
Posts: 1,785
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericcarlson View Post
I haven't noted any patching for HPD, other than Citywide during HFD's brief stint on the public works simulcast. What I have heard is testing. These will likely be the FDMA multicast talkgroups for wreckers (and us).
I did see a photo in the Houston Chronicle the other day of an HPD officer at a National Night Out event. She seemed to be using an APX7000.
__________________
Michael
BCD436HP*BCD536HP*BCD996XT*PSR500
XTS5000 M2 VHF*ICOM IC-R71A*TEN-TEC RX-350
SHSU '13
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #162 (permalink)  
Old 10-09-2012, 12:08 PM
loumaag's Avatar
Moderator
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Katy, TX
Posts: 13,138
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericcarlson View Post
Some non-TDMA-capable radios are apparently being used. Certain talkgroups (like parking enforcement) are configured to revert to FDMA when there are any non-TDMA radios on the talkgroup.
Are we sure that is the way of things? SB ISD PD primary seems to be always on FDMA. In reference to Prk Enf, I don't know, but in monitoring for the last week, on and off, they have always been on FDMA.
Reply With Quote
  #163 (permalink)  
Old 10-19-2012, 10:33 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3
Cool Its Almost Done!

Hey Guys updating this thread- since it has been awhile but it is about to go live.
Found this thru Google while trying to update my resume since I’m working on this – Thought I’d shed some light from what the systems engineers have told me the system “Should” work. Some things I know since I work on the project.

There are 2 systems
1st one – has 6 towers, is for the public utilities/water and such. The coverage of that system not all that spectacular from what I’m told. The Utilities is already on the system and it is Live.
2nd system- 48 towers (47 active at the moment. One took a huge lightning strike and is being replaced- there will be addition testing for those sectors) currently the project is almost finished with phase 3 testing requirements. There were 157 buildings required by the C.o.H. from Motorola to be tested and passed before they would sign off on it.
Here is R.C.C.’s blurb on it- RCC Consultants: Case Study: City of Houston Interoperable Communications System
Here is the City’s document on it-it’s a bit long… http://www.houstontx.gov/itd/radio/c...erformance.pdf

For those requiring more info:
City of Houston, 700/800 MHZ Trunked Radio System (Project 25) was what I worked with for key words.
Reply With Quote
  #164 (permalink)  
Old 10-21-2012, 1:49 PM
grem467's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunder720 View Post
Hey Guys updating this thread- since it has been awhile but it is about to go live.
Found this thru Google while trying to update my resume since I’m working on this – Thought I’d shed some light from what the systems engineers have told me the system “Should” work. Some things I know since I work on the project.
Which agency/company do you work for on the project? Would I be correct in assuming you are a comdex contractor for the coverage testing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunder720 View Post

There are 2 systems
1st one – has 6 towers
Incorrect...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunder720 View Post
2nd system- 48 towers (47 active at the moment. One took a huge lightning strike and is being replaced-
Interesting... is this what you assumed or were actually told? Might want to go back and ask the "systems engineers" for better information.
Reply With Quote
  #165 (permalink)  
Old 10-21-2012, 6:17 PM
KevinC's Avatar
Moderator
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Houston,Texas
Posts: 1,205
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunder720 View Post
2nd system- 48 towers (47 active at the moment. One took a huge lightning strike and is being replaced- there will be addition testing for those sectors)
A lightning strike that took out the whole site? WOW! I'd like to see that.
__________________
BC-210XLT

"Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something."
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #166 (permalink)  
Old 10-21-2012, 7:26 PM
grem467's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinC View Post
A lightning strike that took out the whole site? WOW! I'd like to see that.
Its what happens when those STs forget to connect the green wire. Ill bet the guys at the project office would blow their tops if that had happened!
Reply With Quote
  #167 (permalink)  
Old 10-27-2012, 12:37 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grem467 View Post
Which agency/company do you work for on the project? Would I be correct in assuming you are a comdex contractor for the coverage testing?


Incorrect...



Interesting... is this what you assumed or were actually told? Might want to go back and ask the "systems engineers" for better information.


================================================== ===================
1st) I was contracted as a neutral 3rd party thru R.C.C. and a temp agency. I had just earned a degree in electronics and communications engineering.
2nd) no- its NOT incorrect. That was the information handed out to us. That was the purpose of 3 weeks of testing- to test the 6 towers. Believe me, they made us keep track of these things. I do believe your wrong.
3rd- Yes I'm sure that the Motorola Commdex Systems engineers, test engineers, and systems designers are pretty sure of what they know. Since, they were working with it.
================================================== ==========================

@KevinC/grem467
I asked the same thing if they had grounded it right, and if the tower had been properly insulated.
I was assured that they had taken every precaution they could, and that the lightning strike had more juice to it then the designers had anticipated in that one strike. Things like that happen right?
I mean, you can tell me that EVERY lightning strike is exactly the same as the one before it and after it?
That means that there isn't a deviation in electricity ever?
IS that what your saying?
I'll ask one of the systems engineers if I can have some pictures and if I can post them. IF he says yes- I'll have them up on tues, or wed.
Reply With Quote
  #168 (permalink)  
Old 10-27-2012, 3:17 PM
Member
   
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 318
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mfn002 View Post
Let's not forget how much these radios cost. Sure, it's one thing to be able to know how to program one, but it's somewhat pointless if you don't have the $400-$600 to fork over for one--even on eBay. And yes, they could steal one, but chances are they wouldn't know how to use it. They could try going online and finding the manual, but I doubt most crooks would go to the trouble of doing that. And as for going here and requesting a file, that requires a programming cable. If the scanner's a Uniden, that would be somewhat of a problem because RadioShack doesn't sell cables for those. Also, it would be somewhat of a crap shoot because the crook probably wouldn't know if the scanner's owner even has the correct system programmed into it. If the crook takes it from, say, a car, there's a 50/50 chance that the driver of said car might not even be from the area, and thus the scanner would probably not even have the local police channels on it.
Ive seen criminals use p-25 scanners more than once in my career. One agency I worked for had a serial burglar using a cloned radio on a Motorola analog type II TRS listening to the burglary suppression unit while he was committing car burglaries.

These are the same gangs that are running mutli state counterfeit check rings, selling high quality fake ID's and SSN cards, bypassing burglar alarms, hot wiring European cars by cloning the RFID keys. There are a lot of very intelligent criminals out there. They too can read a manual on a trunk tracking scanner.

$600 is nothing, a 14 year old kid can make that in one day selling crack on the corner in Houston. A gang can easily send some girl in with a stolen credit card and buy a scanner.

Just last night I was listening to a live feed of an agency in the Dallas area here on RR. The live feed is scanning all their TAC talk groups and I could plainly hear them doing a moving surveillance of a bank robbery suspect all over town. I was listening on my iphone. Ive personally arrested people who were listening to us on their mobile phone using an app that links to a feed from this site.

I am a scanner enthusiast but I firmly support encryption on CID, Narcotics, SWAT, special ops, etc type talk groups. I say leave dispatch TG's in the open unless there is a very good reason not to specific to that agency.
Reply With Quote
  #169 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2012, 3:35 PM
mfn002's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Bryan, Texas
Posts: 1,785
Default

Agreed. Such specialized divisions should keep their traffic secure.

On a related issue to this thread, I was at the Wings Over Houston Air Show yesterday, and (almost) every cop and firefighter I saw there was using an APX7000. It appears that League City has began replacing their XTSs and whatever else they were using with APX7000s. They had an HFD Technical Rescue truck there on display, and there was an APX7000R sitting in a charging cradle in the truck, although it appears that they are still using XTL5000 O5s.
__________________
Michael
BCD436HP*BCD536HP*BCD996XT*PSR500
XTS5000 M2 VHF*ICOM IC-R71A*TEN-TEC RX-350
SHSU '13
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
        
  #170 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2012, 4:38 PM
KevinC's Avatar
Moderator
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Houston,Texas
Posts: 1,205
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunder720 View Post

@KevinC/grem467
I asked the same thing if they had grounded it right, and if the tower had been properly insulated.
I was assured that they had taken every precaution they could, and that the lightning strike had more juice to it then the designers had anticipated in that one strike. Things like that happen right?
I mean, you can tell me that EVERY lightning strike is exactly the same as the one before it and after it?
That means that there isn't a deviation in electricity ever?
IS that what your saying?
I'll ask one of the systems engineers if I can have some pictures and if I can post them. IF he says yes- I'll have them up on tues, or wed.
Cool, I'd really like to see the pictures.
__________________
BC-210XLT

"Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something."
Reply With Quote
  #171 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2012, 5:02 PM
Member
  Shack Photos
Shack photos
RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,444
Default

Using the PSR800 Phase 2 support beta, there is activity on the Houston simulcasts (RFSS 3 sites). I've seen talkgroups 30041 (encrypted), 30092 (encrypted) and 40000 active just this weekend.
Reply With Quote
  #172 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2012, 5:39 PM
grem467's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunder720 View Post
================================================== ===================
1st) I was contracted as a neutral 3rd party thru R.C.C. and a temp agency. I had just earned a degree in electronics and communications engineering.
2nd) no- its NOT incorrect. That was the information handed out to us. That was the purpose of 3 weeks of testing- to test the 6 towers. Believe me, they made us keep track of these things. I do believe your wrong.
3rd- Yes I'm sure that the Motorola Commdex Systems engineers, test engineers, and systems designers are pretty sure of what they know. Since, they were working with it.
================================================== ==========================

@KevinC/grem467
I asked the same thing if they had grounded it right, and if the tower had been properly insulated.
I was assured that they had taken every precaution they could, and that the lightning strike had more juice to it then the designers had anticipated in that one strike. Things like that happen right?
I mean, you can tell me that EVERY lightning strike is exactly the same as the one before it and after it?
That means that there isn't a deviation in electricity ever?
IS that what your saying?
I'll ask one of the systems engineers if I can have some pictures and if I can post them. IF he says yes- I'll have them up on tues, or wed.
First off the GGSL is SEVEN sites not six.. how do i know? well look at the FCC licenses. I think my name on the bottom of them has a tad bit of credibility.

As for the rest, Commdex is not involved with the planning, engineering, installation, maintence or administration of the system. They were hired for ONE purpose: to perform the required contractural coverage tests. Any training you received as a sub-contractor was for the SOLE purpose of learning various DAQ levels and other items within the scope of coverage testing.

As someone who DIRECTLY was involved in the system (as well as others in this very thread) I can assure you that the information you have is incorrect on several fronts. I get that at the level you are reporting from its a game of "telephone" but Its one thing to say "they told us", its another to pass it off as official information and then to argue with people who are closer to the project. Mis-information is how rumors and negative press are created.
Reply With Quote
  #173 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2012, 5:41 PM
grem467's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunder720 View Post
@KevinC/grem467
I asked the same thing if they had grounded it right, and if the tower had been properly insulated.
I was assured that they had taken every precaution they could, and that the lightning strike had more juice to it then the designers had anticipated in that one strike. Things like that happen right?
I mean, you can tell me that EVERY lightning strike is exactly the same as the one before it and after it?
That means that there isn't a deviation in electricity ever?
IS that what your saying?
I'll ask one of the systems engineers if I can have some pictures and if I can post them. IF he says yes- I'll have them up on tues, or wed.
As for this, i HIGHLY recommend you go take the R56 classes. You would be surprised how similar a lightning strike is in terms of proper grounding of a telecommunications site.
Reply With Quote
  #174 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2012, 5:44 PM
grem467's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mfn002 View Post
although it appears that they are still using XTL5000 O5s.
Keep in mind both the APX and XTL mobiles use the O5 control head. You can even just swap the drawer in a remote mount and the APX drawer will reflash the control head to the firmware required for the APX to operate with it.
Reply With Quote
  #175 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2012, 6:08 PM
mfn002's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Bryan, Texas
Posts: 1,785
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grem467 View Post
Keep in mind both the APX and XTL mobiles use the O5 control head. You can even just swap the drawer in a remote mount and the APX drawer will reflash the control head to the firmware required for the APX to operate with it.
Ah. That makes sense. I was wondering why they had an APX handheld with what appeared to be an XTL. The head wasn't labeled as an XTL5000, only "O5". I guess it would be easier to just replace the drawer than to go through and rip out the entire radio, control head and all.
__________________
Michael
BCD436HP*BCD536HP*BCD996XT*PSR500
XTS5000 M2 VHF*ICOM IC-R71A*TEN-TEC RX-350
SHSU '13
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
        
  #176 (permalink)  
Old 10-29-2012, 9:18 AM
grem467's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,035
Default

The "new" heads just say O5 on them, but they are electrically identical (at this time) to the ones that say XTL5000 on them. They also have a darker grey faceplate than the "legacy" heads.
Reply With Quote
  #177 (permalink)  
Old 10-29-2012, 5:01 PM
mfn002's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Bryan, Texas
Posts: 1,785
Default

By the way, what does "O5" mean?
__________________
Michael
BCD436HP*BCD536HP*BCD996XT*PSR500
XTS5000 M2 VHF*ICOM IC-R71A*TEN-TEC RX-350
SHSU '13
Reply With Quote
  #178 (permalink)  
Old 10-29-2012, 6:36 PM
Member
   
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Silsbee, Texas
Posts: 82
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mfn002 View Post
By the way, what does "O5" mean?
It's the name for the type of control head used on there mobile radios. There are about 4 of them that will work. I believe they will work for either the Apex radios or the XTL radios.

Mike Dupree
Reply With Quote
  #179 (permalink)  
Old 10-30-2012, 12:21 AM
Señor Member
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,853
Default

Here's an O5 ...
Attached Images
 
Reply With Quote
  #180 (permalink)  
Old 10-30-2012, 7:42 AM
mfn002's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Bryan, Texas
Posts: 1,785
Default

That's what I saw. Mystery solved!
__________________
Michael
BCD436HP*BCD536HP*BCD996XT*PSR500
XTS5000 M2 VHF*ICOM IC-R71A*TEN-TEC RX-350
SHSU '13
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
sticky

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All information here is Copyright 2012 by RadioReference.com LLC and Lindsay C. Blanton III.Ad Management by RedTyger
Copyright 2011 by RadioReference.com LLC Privacy Policy  |  Terms and Conditions