My company gave me the task of researching, budgeting and implementing a radio system for our campus. After spending weeks diving into this project, I've got a decent budget for 200 radios and 2 repeaters with trunking - from Hytera. All good, and my budget proposal is on the lines for financial approval. Meanwhile, I told my (to-be) vendor that I performed some tests with 2 sample radios and a single test-repeater, and encountered 2-3 dead spots around the campus (actually a lot better result than I expected).
In reply to that, my vendor is telling me that the 6.25KHz bandwidth of the NXDN has better coverage and penetration into the basements of buildings where I have dead zones. At the same time, I also notice that the Kenwood repeater is "only" 40W as opposed to the 50W of Hytera. Also, when I did my tests, I was using a roof antenna with 3dB gain, while the quoted antenna has 7dB gain.
So now, is this correct that penetration should be better with the 6.25KHz bandwidth? Also, isn't the narrower bandwidth requires more voice compression, resulting in worse sound quality (much like voip over bad internet line requires more compression with more data-loss, resulting on worse sound quality?)
And if this penetration is really better, isn't that benefit cancelled out by the weaker repeater?
I don't have a quote from my vendor for a Kenwood system that matches the Hytera system he quoted, so I don't know yet, if going with Kenwood will be cheaper or more expensive compared to Hytera, but would be good to get a 2nd (or more) opinion on the above questions.
Finally, if the answers are all pointing in the Kenwood direction, the main feature I'm after is that I have 2 repeaters, with 4 talk-paths, and those 4 paths are dynamically assigned (as opposed to different groups being assigned a static talk-path), to best utilize available capacity. Will 2 Kenwood repeaters, networked, do that for me?
In reply to that, my vendor is telling me that the 6.25KHz bandwidth of the NXDN has better coverage and penetration into the basements of buildings where I have dead zones. At the same time, I also notice that the Kenwood repeater is "only" 40W as opposed to the 50W of Hytera. Also, when I did my tests, I was using a roof antenna with 3dB gain, while the quoted antenna has 7dB gain.
So now, is this correct that penetration should be better with the 6.25KHz bandwidth? Also, isn't the narrower bandwidth requires more voice compression, resulting in worse sound quality (much like voip over bad internet line requires more compression with more data-loss, resulting on worse sound quality?)
And if this penetration is really better, isn't that benefit cancelled out by the weaker repeater?
I don't have a quote from my vendor for a Kenwood system that matches the Hytera system he quoted, so I don't know yet, if going with Kenwood will be cheaper or more expensive compared to Hytera, but would be good to get a 2nd (or more) opinion on the above questions.
Finally, if the answers are all pointing in the Kenwood direction, the main feature I'm after is that I have 2 repeaters, with 4 talk-paths, and those 4 paths are dynamically assigned (as opposed to different groups being assigned a static talk-path), to best utilize available capacity. Will 2 Kenwood repeaters, networked, do that for me?