B.C. cops file complaint over radios

Status
Not open for further replies.

Thunderbolt

Global Database Administrator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 23, 2001
Messages
7,110
Location
Ann Arbor, Michigan
BATTLE CREEK, Mich. -- Battle Creek police officers have filed a formal complaint about the department's ongoing problems with a new $4 million radio system.


"It's pretty bad," Officer Joe Wilder, president of the Police Officers Labor Council, said Tuesday. "There are going to be some bodies we are going to lose."

Wilder said the latest incident was at noon Tuesday when Officer Mark Woolfolk was involved in a foot chase with a suspect, but the 911 dispatch operator did not hear Woolfolk call on the radio.


Wilder and Cmdr. Jackie Hampton said other officers did hear Woolfolk and relayed the information to the dispatcher.


Wilder said he listened to a recording of the incident. "You hear him call out and then a pause and then you don't hear anything else," he said. "Dispatch doesn't know, and no one can hear him. Other officers picked up his signal that he was in a foot chase."


The 800-megahertz radio system was activated in March, replacing a VHF system for the city, Emmett Township, Springfield and the Calhoun County Sheriff Department. Officials in Springfield and the Sheriff Department said the system is an improvement, but officers in Battle Creek and Emmett Township say they often don't hear transmissions.


Battle Creek Chief David Headings said portable VHF radios will be issued to officers as a backup system beginning with the midnight shift Tuesday.


"We can't go back fully to the old system, and we have to have the new radios to find out what the problem is," Headings said. "We can't just drop the new system and go back to the old. The 800 MHz is the ongoing thing."


In the grievance dated May 31, Wilder wrote: "Since the induction of the 800 MHz there have been problems with the system not working. Officers have missed radio transmissions from dispatch and vice versa. The current system has shown to be unreliable. This is a serious and dangerous situation for Battle Creek Police Officers not to be able to communicate with other officers and the dispatch center."


Wilder said the grievance must go to Headings and then to city officials, including City Manager Wayne Wiley. If the union is not satisfied, the complaint can be presented to a labor arbitrator, though the process could take six to 12 months.


Hampton, who supervises the patrol division, said he is not sure a grievance can be filed over the issue, under the terms of the contract.


"But we are not upset about their putting in the grievance," Hampton said. "They want to formally channel their frustration, and I certainly understand their frustration. The entire agency is frustrated."


Hampton said the department is returning to the VHF system "so we can sleep at night knowing officers are taking 911 calls."


Battle Creek Assistant City Manager Ken Tsuchiyama said technicians from Motorola have been working on problems locally and with state officials because the system is part of the Michigan Public Safety Communications System, a statewide network of local, state and federal agencies.


"With any system, there are problems. The previous VHF system had some coverage problems, too," he said. "There are some issues with the 800 system we didn't anticipate, and we are continuing to push Motorola, as the vendor, and the state to try to solve the problems."


Motorola technicians were performing several tests on Tuesday, Tsuchiyama said, and he expected at least some of the results today.


"You get more concerned when it's a public safety matter simply because you don't want some malfunction in the system to result in a serious problem," he said. "We have officers who are concerned about not only their safety, but the safety of the citizens they serve, and if they didn't care, I'd worry."

http://www.battlecreekenquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070606/NEWS01/706060326
 

iMONITOR

Silent Key
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
11,156
Location
S.E. Michigan
From what I've heard, that's status quo for MPSCS as it's rolled out in new areas. Then several months, and a few extra towers later, things start working fairly well.
 

FPO703

Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2001
Messages
2,630
Location
Planet Earth
That's why you do coverage testing BEFORE you allow your system to 'go live'.

Some people just don't get it.
 

mcema699

Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2005
Messages
258
Its Not Just 800

The city here switched from their 800 back to 450mhz. They have similar problems of dispatch not hearing officers and the other way around. They thought going back to UHF would cure that.

Its not always equipment or other officers and scanner listeners would miss the transmissions as well.

There's just too many signals bouncing around anymore.
 
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
1,738
Location
Soledad, CA
How come they don't just do VHF or UHF trucking with the freqs they use? Is FCC forcing most public safety to use 800mhz? Or is the lack of frequencies in the VHF or UHF band to do truking?
 
Last edited:

rdale

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 3, 2001
Messages
11,380
Location
Lansing, MI
There's no room in UHF/VHF for a statewide truNking system.
 

K2KOH

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 30, 2001
Messages
2,739
Location
Putnam County, NY
The problem here is not enough testing before switching systems. I sincerely hope when the New York System goes up, they keep the old VHF system up while issuing troopers 800 radios to test with.
When your backup is miles away, SECONDS count!
 
N

N_Jay

Guest
AEMTKieran said:
. . . . . . .
When your backup is miles away, SECONDS count!

This sounds good, but can you explain exactly how "seconds count" when backup is miles away?

It would seem that either seconds county, or they do not, and how far backup is is irrelevant.

Actually, the way I am thinking about it, if back up is more than a minute or 2 away, seconds no longer count.
 

ctrabs74

Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
798
Location
California, PA
rdale said:
There's no room in UHF/VHF for a statewide truNking system.

That may be the case for a system the size of Michigan's, but some states such as Montana, Wyoming, and Virginia are building out VHF-trunked systems. It's possible to do a state-wide VHF trunk system in a few cases, but clearly not for Michigan...
 

mancow

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Feb 19, 2003
Messages
6,880
Location
N.E. Kansas
Are you hungover?




N_Jay said:
This sounds good, but can you explain exactly how "seconds count" when backup is miles away?

It would seem that either seconds county, or they do not, and how far backup is is irrelevant.

Actually, the way I am thinking about it, if back up is more than a minute or 2 away, seconds no longer count.
 

bigbluemsp

Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2004
Messages
1,692
Location
Michigan
N_Jay said:
This sounds good, but can you explain exactly how "seconds count" when backup is miles away?

It would seem that either seconds county, or they do not, and how far backup is is irrelevant.

Actually, the way I am thinking about it, if back up is more than a minute or 2 away, seconds no longer count.


SECONDS DO MATTER. If you can't reach dispatch then those few minutes are delayed and 3 becomes 5, 7 or 10 minutes for your backup to get to you.

But since you knew this already I didn't think I had to type it out but apparently I do because from your statement you didn't know it.
 
N

N_Jay

Guest
bigbluemsp said:
SECONDS DO MATTER. If you can't reach dispatch then those few minutes are delayed and 3 becomes 5, 7 or 10 minutes for your backup to get to you.

But since you knew this already I didn't think I had to type it out but apparently I do because from your statement you didn't know it.

OK, so 3, 5, 7, or 10 minutes matter.

NOW, will someone please explain how 10 minuets is significantly different than 10 minutes and 5 seconds?
 

ElroyJetson

I AM NOT YOUR TECH SUPPPORT.
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 8, 2002
Messages
3,703
Location
DO NOT ASK ME FOR HELP PROGRAMMING YOUR RADIO. NO.
800 MHz is optimal for working in the concrete jungle of larger cities, and should not be
the "standard" band that is used in public safety.

UHF is a more sensible all-around choice, suitable in cities and suburbs, and VHF is
better if things are more spread out. In large rural areas, VHF low band is best.


I truly wish that every agency that was considering a new system had at least one
competent RF engineer on their staff whose only job was to ensure that they got the
optimal system solution for their actual needs and environment.

Elroy
 

jparks29

John McClane
Joined
Nov 20, 2003
Messages
859
Location
Nakatomi Plaza
N_Jay said:
NOW, will someone please explain how 10 minuets is significantly different than 10 minutes and 5 seconds?

You have a bomb that is going to go off in 10 minutes, but it will take you 10 minutes and 5 seconds to succesfully defuse it.....

:evil:
 
N

N_Jay

Guest
jparks29 said:
You have a bomb that is going to go off in 10 minutes, but it will take you 10 minutes and 5 seconds to succesfully defuse it.....

:evil:

That gives you 10 minutes to get away, and any additional distance in the 10 seconds is irrelevant.

(Set, Point, Match)
 

zz0468

QRT
Banned
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
6,034
ElroyJetson said:
I truly wish that every agency that was considering a new system had at least one competent RF engineer on their staff whose only job was to ensure that they got the optimal system solution for their actual needs and environment.

I know of one agency that chased their engineers away, with management saying "We don't need subject matter experts, we need team players". They now face a $150 million dollar project without one engineer on staff, and no one will fill the vacant positions. The problem is, projects of this size are driven primarily by politics. And when the politics has a pre-conceived notion as to what they want, it sometimes doesn't matter what the engineer has to say - the decisions are frequently already made. And guess who gets the blame when it doesn't work.

No, I'm not bitter. :wink:
 

batdude

Florida Db Admin / Florida Forum Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jul 29, 2002
Messages
1,503
Location
East Central, Florida
zz - ur dead on.

no system is EVER built / bought without a "coverage clause" - and that is entirely up to the buyer.... if moto/macom say you need 12 towers and the cost is XXX million.....

the budget guys cut that to 8 towers and call themselves heroes - saving XX million....


then you get the above.

everything i've seen about this system up there is that it was sold as a MOBILE COVERAGE SYSTEM - not portable........ with "fill ins" to be added later.




doug
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top