compare Motorola SmartZone and TETRA technology

[htungvn]

I read SmartZone and TETRA technology.But in fact,i cann't distinguish Smartzone from Tetra technology.So,pls help me compare them

 

[Comint]

I read SmartZone and TETRA technology.But in fact,i cann't distinguish Smartzone from Tetra technology.So,pls help me compare them

I recommend you read more carefully.

For starters, SmartZone is Analog FM. TETRA is Digital 4 slot TDMA.

--
Comint

 

[greenthumb]

They are both wide area communications systems supporting user mobility, but aside from that there are a lot of differences. There is a lot of literature available on the internet, and even from some online book stores, which can fill you in on TETRA.

 

[htungvn]

Thanks for answer my questions. I'm agree that the TETRA Technican is more advantage than SmartZone.Because Smartzone seem Analog and TETRA is Digital. But why has Smartzone still used in America and Motorola still have a plan to upgrade Smartzone to Type 2 ?

 

[wlmr]

You're reading old info if you are reading about Smartzone being upgraded to Type II. Happened quite a while ago. If you're wanting to compare digital trunking technologies I'd recommend reading up on P25, also known as Project 25 digital. Motorola's version is known as Astro 25.

 

[kayn1n32008]

edit. please delete my post

 

[jsharp2316]

TETRA is not due to be phased out in a few years if you don't upgrade for near the original cost of the system. Seriously, Smart Zone is a proprietary Motorola protocol using a analog control channel. I beleive the latter versions like EDACS provoice will allow digital voice calls. While TETRA is the WW standard for digital public safety radio with 4 voice paths in 25 KHz and includes standards on broadband and other public safety data requirements. TETRA is a Open standard outside the US because of Motorola IP issues. Go back and re-read the descriptions.

 

[kayn1n32008]

TETRA is not due to be phased out in a few years if you don't upgrade for near the original cost of the system. Seriously, Smart Zone is a proprietary Motorola protocol using a analog control channel. I beleive the latter versions like EDACS provoice will allow digital voice calls. While TETRA is the WW standard for digital public safety radio with 4 voice paths in 25 KHz and includes standards on broadband and other public safety data requirements. TETRA is a Open standard outside the US because of Motorola IP issues. Go back and re-read the descriptions.

They are really more different than they are alike. TETRA is a cellular like approach (lowpower handhelds lots of small 'cells' ) where SmartZone uses alot more power with less towers for coverage.

SmartZone will allow digital voice but the control channel is still analog where P25 is digital all around as is TETRA

 

[ElroyJetson]

There's some bad information here. Motorola's control channels are ALWAYS digital. No such thing as an analog control channel.

SmartZone is a traffic handling system integrated into a multi-site trunking system. It allows a user to get the talkgroups he selects no matter where he is in the system. The calls follow him as he moves
from site to site. Where he's currently logged in is where the talkgroups he's selected are sent to.

SmartZone in its earlier form was analog voice, digital control, and traffic routing across the network
where needed.

Astro SmartZone is fully digital, voice as well as control channel, and operates in a similar manner.

Astro 25 is essentially the same thing with a few changes made to some aspects of the digital
signalling information...and always includes a 9600 baud control channel format. Earlier systems
may be 3600 and sometimes 9600 baud types.

Elroy

 

[dmills1]

I couldn't stand it any longer. Elroy needs a lesson. Motorola trunking system control channels from the original Type I trunking systems through Privacy Plus, Smartnet, Smartnet II, Smartzone, 2.03, 3.0, 3.5 and 4.1 have always been analog modulated data. Not digitally modulated data. Even the ASTRO Only Smartnet and Smartzone systems require analog circuitry on the channels used as control channels. They run at 3600 bps. The ASTRO (P25) voice channel are 9600 BPS digital.

New P25 trunking system control channels are indeed digital. The control channel and voice channels all run at 9600. Analog circuitry is not required.

Dennis

 

[N_Jay]

Seem like some people don't understand all that they know.

Motorola's trunking control channel is 3600 BIT PER SECOND 2 level FSK (3600 baud) Digital. It is not modem tones on an analog channel (as some would surmise from the description of it is "Analog Data".

SmartZone was originally the Motorola's brand for multi-site SmartNet systems, and then became the brand name for all missions critical trunked systems.

Motorola sold trunked systems using this control channel modulation (I did not say "format" because I did not want to have to get into a whole discussion on Privacy Plus vs. SmartNet vs. SmartZone, vs. Type 1, vs. Type 2, vs. Hybrid, etc.) using analog voice channels, 12 KBPS CVSD Digital (DVP and DES) Securnet voice channels, 9600 BPS 4 level FSK/PSK (C4FM/CQPSK/Wide Pulse) modulation (4800 Baud) carrying Astro (VSELP) or P25 (IMBE) voice.

And Motorola now sells their ASTRO25 system that is P25 C4FM/CQPSK 9600 bits per second (4800 Baud) on all channels.

 

[K8TEK]

I couldn't stand it any longer. Elroy needs a lesson. Motorola trunking system control channels from the original Type I trunking systems through Privacy Plus, Smartnet, Smartnet II, Smartzone, 2.03, 3.0, 3.5 and 4.1 have always been analog modulated data. Not digitally modulated data. Even the ASTRO Only Smartnet and Smartzone systems require analog circuitry on the channels used as control channels. They run at 3600 bps. The ASTRO (P25) voice channel are 9600 BPS digital.

New P25 trunking system control channels are indeed digital. The control channel and voice channels all run at 9600. Analog circuitry is not required.

Dennis

Wow, that is chock full of false information. FSK is digital.

 

[Mike_G_D]

I couldn't stand it any longer. Elroy needs a lesson. Motorola trunking system control channels from the original Type I trunking systems through Privacy Plus, Smartnet, Smartnet II, Smartzone, 2.03, 3.0, 3.5 and 4.1 have always been analog modulated data. Not digitally modulated data. Even the ASTRO Only Smartnet and Smartzone systems require analog circuitry on the channels used as control channels. They run at 3600 bps. The ASTRO (P25) voice channel are 9600 BPS digital.

New P25 trunking system control channels are indeed digital. The control channel and voice channels all run at 9600. Analog circuitry is not required.

Dennis

WOW! I guess I am sure behind the times with my experience working on radios transmitting and receiving various forms of digital and analog modulation! Guess no more A/D, D/A, I/Q mod/demod, RF/IF oscillators, filters, amplifiers, matching circuits and baseband analog audio processing circuits! I guess all that old "radio" stuff is obsolete, radio inherently being "analog" and all (unless you want to get all quantum about it, of course) because it's all been replaced by "wireless digital". Oh that magic wireless digital! Such mysterious and incredible stuff since no old fashioned analog radio circuitry is involved in it at all - I will, of course, never understand it so I will, I suppose, simply give up to blissful ignorance and yield to my obvious dinosaur status. Ahh well...I still have the memories...

Sorry, I simply could not resist though I probably should have;-)!

-Mike

 

[GooddayM8]

What about the Motorola IP patents referred to? Why is TETRA not available in the US? Is it due to Motorola as I've read, or the FCC as stated here:
Plenty of obstacles exist to block TETRA in the U.S. -- Urgent Communications article

 

[N_Jay]

What about the Motorola IP patents referred to? Why is TETRA not available in the US? Is it due to Motorola as I've read, or the FCC as stated here:
Plenty of obstacles exist to block TETRA in the U.S. -- Urgent Communications article

Lost of reasons.

The patents are part, but a bigger part is that it was not designed to any of the FCC rules for any band.

Additionally, TETRA is not a good fit for the requirements of our market. If it were, there would be a lot more privately owned or governmental iDEN systems.

 

[radiofan1]

WOW! I guess I am sure behind the times with my experience working on radios transmitting and receiving various forms of digital and analog modulation! Guess no more A/D, D/A, I/Q mod/demod, RF/IF oscillators, filters, amplifiers, matching circuits and baseband analog audio processing circuits! I guess all that old "radio" stuff is obsolete, radio inherently being "analog" and all (unless you want to get all quantum about it, of course) because it's all been replaced by "wireless digital". Oh that magic wireless digital! Such mysterious and incredible stuff since no old fashioned analog radio circuitry is involved in it at all - I will, of course, never understand it so I will, I suppose, simply give up to blissful ignorance and yield to my obvious dinosaur status. Ahh well...I still have the memories...

Sorry, I simply could not resist though I probably should have;-)!

-Mike

Mike, remember it's all "electronic theory" anyway so we don't even know if it really works or not, right?

 

[kc4wai]

Just an opinion regarding Digital...

I will not pretend as if I know a heck-of-a-lot about digital trunking, be it Astro 25 or TETRA. When it comes to radios I'm kinda 'old school' as they say. Where I will say that digital radio systems DO have their place in the wireless world, I would like to point out that there was nothing wrong with analog to begin with. Although the illustrious folks in Schaumburg, Illinois would have us believe otherwise. Certainly a great way to sell $30 Million digital radio systems to public safety agencies that don't know any better. Do I dare cite the incidents where digital trunking systems have endangered the lives of fire fighters? Digital radio is the future....but it still has a long way to go.

 

[N_Jay]

Where I will say that digital radio systems DO have their place in the wireless world,

Yes they do.

I would like to point out that there was nothing wrong with analog to begin with.

Except for few standardized features (ID, Emergency, Location, Talk Groups, Encryption, Messaging, Status, Etc.)
AND
Reduced range at 12.5 kHz and no way to get to 6.25 kHz (equivalent or otherwise)
AND
Poorer effective sensitivity
AND
. . .

Although the illustrious folks in Schaumburg, Illinois would have us believe otherwise.

Don't leave out the people in Lynchburg, VA, Melbourne, Fl, Rochester, NY, Irving, TX, San Antonio, TX, and lots of other places.
(I love how it is always the vendor and never the buyer.)

Certainly a great way to sell $30 Million digital radio systems to public safety agencies that don't know any better.

First, I would hazard a guess that to put all the desired and requested features into a ANALOG system would cost just as much if not more.
Second, you really need to give your brethren more credit. Are you saying that all these other agencies "don't know better" and somehow you have this special knowledge?:roll:

Do I dare cite the incidents where digital trunking systems have endangered the lives of fire fighters?

Do you dare cite the instances where ANALOG trunking and non-trunked systems did the same?
Maybe you need to do a deep dive. The systems are not perfect, no system is, but there are far more "failures to follow proper procedures" than "radio system failures".
We would all like perfection. We just don';t live in that world!

Digital radio is the future....but it still has a long way to go.

In your (all knowing) opinion.

 

[kc4wai]

My (all knowing) opinion? Hardly. Which is why I prefaced my statement with "I will not pretend as if I know a heck-of-a-lot about digital trunking...". You certainly did bring up some good points there N_Jay. No system is perfect and my gripe is not just with the vendors (they are in business to make money and I can't fault them for that). Another concern that I did not address in my previous statement is the over reliance on hard ware in today's world. Here we are in 2010 with government entities having spent tens of millions on digital radio systems with the promise of 'interoperability'. Doesn't matter how many state-of-the-art wireless systems you put on the air. If the agencies themselves don't want to interact with each other, then you don't have 'interoperability'. Much is the case in my area...Metro Atlanta.

Not to beat a dead horse, I still don't think there is anything wrong with analog. It solely depends on the application. And you're right in that digital formats can offer some advantages. Just seems to me like a lot of people are jumping on this digital band wagon....except for the NYPD. An agency that has neither gone trunked nor digital, and has no intention to do so anytime soon.

 

[N_Jay]

My (all knowing) opinion? Hardly.

Sorry, but your that is the way both your decree that the agencies "don't know any better", combined with your declaration "Digital radio is the future....but it still has a long way to go", sure came across that way.

. . .Another concern that I did not address in my previous statement is the over reliance on hard ware in today's world. Here we are in 2010 with government entities having spent tens of millions on digital radio systems with the promise of 'interoperability'. Doesn't matter how many state-of-the-art wireless systems you put on the air. If the agencies themselves don't want to interact with each other, then you don't have 'interoperability'.

I agree 100%, but somehow the cost always gets associated with "digital" and not the functions. At least most agencies have started moving in the right direction. (sometimes kicking and screaming)

Not to beat a dead horse, I still don't think there is anything wrong with analog. It solely depends on the application. And you're right in that digital formats can offer some advantages. Just seems to me like a lot of people are jumping on this digital band wagon.

Very much so, and most public safety applications are requiring the features and functions only available on a digital system, or significantly better supported on a digital system.

. . . .except for the NYPD. An agency that has neither gone trunked nor digital, and has no intention to do so anytime soon.

You might want to keep track of their current work efforts. (Look at their Broadband activities)

Like LAPD, they are highly sectored, hence why they don't use trunking. (LAPD uses non-trunked digital) As for digital, I think it may have more to do with legacy systems than any active decision.