digital ltr

[tbharper]

i take it there is no digital LTR system or is there

 

[Avenger44]

No there Is no Digital LTR . Just LTR , LTR-NET , and MULTI-NET .

Steve.

 

[Southtown800]

passport LTR as well, and smart trunk, i think LTR is being Phased out of 800mhz and mostly used in UHF now

 

[DaveNF2G]

LTR control of digital repeaters should be possible, although I can't imagine why anyone would bother...

 

[LTR]

I've heard that Trident is working on a digital version of PassPort.

 

[N_Jay]

I've heard that Trident is working on a digital version of PassPort.

That would be interesting because they would have to partner with a radio company to pick and manufacture a digital format radio that is capable of "subaudible" data, simultaneous with the vocoded voice.

Then again, anything is possible.

I "heard" the world is ending tomorrow! (Oh wait, that was just the drunk at the bus stop)

 

[N_Jay]

LTR control of digital repeaters should be possible, although I can't imagine why anyone would bother...

And how do you propose they pass the subaudible data?

 

[DaveNF2G]

Digital is just another emission mode. Why can't LTR data be sent digitally? It would become DLTR, but that answers the description.

 

[N_Jay]

Digital is just another emission mode. Why can't LTR data be sent digitally? It would become DLTR, but that answers the description.

If it were only that simple.

The issue is that the success of LTR was mostly due to the ability for almost any analog radio be able to handle the LTR format.

The low-speed data fits in the ctcss/dcs analog bandpass (Below 300 Hz), and the voice or 1200 BPS data fits in the voice bandpass (300 to 2400 Hz).

When you go to digital equipment the encoding and modulation systems it is not as simple.
There is not an easy and uniform one-to-one relationship.

If someone were to put in all the effort to design a whole new protocol to fit "LTR" on a digital format, why would you want it to be LTR? (Other than maybe no control channel)

 

[DaveNF2G]

Not to mention decentralized trunking.

I think your hair-splitting demonstrates a desire to show off "superior" knowledge rather than a highly considered and genuine technological issue. Digital LTR is not conceptually as complicated as you make it sound. I hope actual system designers aren't as easily discouraged as you appear to be.

Then again, I guess we hobbyists would be better off if designers were put off by "complicated" innovations. Then we wouldn't have to buy new scanners so often.

By the way, if somebody starts selling a DLTR-type system, I want royalties!

 

[N_Jay]

Not to mention decentralized trunking.

I think your hair-splitting demonstrates a desire to show off "superior" knowledge rather than a highly considered and genuine technological issue. Digital LTR is not conceptually as complicated as you make it sound. I hope actual system designers aren't as easily discouraged as you appear to be.

Then again, I guess we hobbyists would be better off if designers were put off by "complicated" innovations. Then we wouldn't have to buy new scanners so often.

By the way, if somebody starts selling a DLTR-type system, I want royalties!

Well, I guess if you define it as;
"something digital that does something like what LTR does"
then conceptually it is easy. :roll:

However everything is "conceptually easy"

You seem to have in your mind exactly what DLTR is, and what it is not.
I guess I don't have your vision.

EDIT:

Just to clarify what you call "hair-splitting".
If you want royalties for what DLTR is, you had better have a very good definition of what DLTR is not!
(in the patent game, definition is everything, and nothing defines and issue better then defining the other side.)

 

[Avenger44]

EF Johnson is not doing Much at all anymore with LTR . There now going to Multi-Net , Multi-Net II , and Multi-Net III Digital P25 Trunking .

Steve.

 

[N_Jay]

EF Johnson is not doing Much at all anymore with LTR . There now going to Multi-Net , Multi-Net II , and Multi-Net III Digital P25 Trunking .

Steve.

I don't think EFJ is doing anything with Multi-Net at all.
I have not seen them use the name in relation to there P25 products at all.

If you have a link it would be helpful.

 

[Avenger44]

http://www.efjohnson.com/products/ascendmobile.asp

 

[Avenger44]

There U go N Jay ..... I have a Few Of these radios . Chester County , PA . then there is DOD . US Army . and a few othere's .

Steve.

 

[N_Jay]

There U go N Jay ..... I have a Few Of these radios . Chester County , PA . then there is DOD . US Army . and a few othere's .

Steve.

Cool.

At least they did not leave their Multi-Net customers high and dry.

Still nothing about P25 being called "Multi-Net III", but another link could make me wrong twice in one day.

 

[Avenger44]

Multi-Net III is Multi-Net Tunking but with P25 Mixed in . So you can use Analog or P25 On the Multi-Net Trunked System . It's not on File as Multi-Net III , But it is Sold to the Customer as Multi-Net III .

 

[N_Jay]

Multi-Net III is Multi-Net Tunking but with P25 Mixed in . So you can use Analog or P25 On the Multi-Net Trunked System . It's not on File as Multi-Net III , But it is Sold to the Customer as Multi-Net III .

Interesting.

Any information you have on putting P25 on a Multi-Net system would be helpful.

 

[Avenger44]

Interesting.

Any information you have on putting P25 on a Multi-Net system would be helpful.

I'll see what I can find . and Post the Information . I do alot of Programming with EF Johnson Radios . Convetional , LTR, Radios , and Multi-Net Radios .

Steve.

 

[Avenger44]

Hear Is some Information About EF Johnson LTR Trunked System .

http://www.signalharbor.com/ttt/00may/index.html