• Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

Denver PS system question

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 21, 2006
Messages
1,397
#1
I have another dumb question, I searched and could not find an answer so I thought I would pick the minds of some of the experts here. How can a Department as big as Denver Public safety go from using 24 frequencies to 19, and still make sure that when someone keys up they get though? It just seems like to me with less frequencies people would be walking all over each other when they are trying to get out on the radio. Denver PD has what 6 districts, a TO unit not to mention the Detective channels and the swat Channels. Then Denver Fire has a ton of talk groups with all their fire grounds and all. So getting rid of those 4 frequencies seems like a bad thing to me. Can someone tell me what I missing? Thanks for your time in advance.
 

abqscan

DataBase Administrator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 8, 2002
Messages
2,610
Location
AOA
#2
Because not everyone talks at the same time all the time, thus the purpose of trunking! If you watched the system via unitrunker or etrunk, you can see that its very rare when it gets over 75% full at one time.
 
Joined
Jan 21, 2006
Messages
1,397
#3
abqscan said:
Because not everyone talks at the same time all the time, thus the purpose of trunking! If you watched the system via unitrunker or etrunk, you can see that its very rare when it gets over 75% full at one time.

Ok I can understand that somewhat. But then what happens when the DNC rolls around Erik? In past threads and in the news it sounds like there will be a ton more users on the Denver PS system. So why not wait till after to cut the frequencies. I thought it was always better to have them and not need them rather then not have them and need them?
 
Joined
Jan 21, 2006
Messages
1,397
#5
abqscan said:
Why does it sound this way?

I am just referring to the news articles and the past posts here, about how DPD is asking for help from around the state to help with the DNC. Also the news stories about all the groups that are planning to protest around "the can" that week. So that to me tells me there is going to be a ton more users then the "normal" load on the system, Does that make what I am asking more clear?
 
Joined
Jan 20, 2002
Messages
2,026
Location
Greeley, CO
#6
Lets do the math shall we?

The old Mt Morrison site has 24 repeaters. The 8th Ave backup site may have had up to 20 repeaters if memory serves me correctly.

The new 7 site simulcast system has 20 repeaters per site for a total of 140 repeaters.

Adding the additional 4 channels would require an additional 28 repeaters along with voting receiver equipment. I'm thinking along the lines of cost and budget on this one.

Can the network handle the additional radio traffic? I'm thinking yes.

Phil.
 
Joined
Jan 21, 2006
Messages
1,397
#7
scanlist said:
Lets do the math shall we?

The old Mt Morrison site has 24 repeaters. The 8th Ave backup site may have had up to 20 repeaters if memory serves me correctly.

The new 7 site simulcast system has 20 repeaters per site for a total of 140 repeaters.

Adding the additional 4 channels would require an additional 28 repeaters along with voting receiver equipment. I'm thinking along the lines of cost and budget on this one.

Can the network handle the additional radio traffic? I'm thinking yes.

Phil.
Thank you Phil, that is exactly what I wanted to know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top