• 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

Motorola wins new slers contract!!!!

Joined
Sep 8, 2002
Messages
2,433
Location
Florida, where you wish you were!
#3
Prediction: Unless the coverage requirement is altered, and more sites added to improve coverage, having this contract would be a trap for any company that gets it.

If an officer get hurt or killed because his portable radio won't work, 20 miles from the nearest tower site, guess who gets the blame? Never mind that at that location a mobile radio will work and signal coverage is exactly according to contract specifications.

It's a trap!
 

IAmSixNine

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,473
Location
Dallas, TX
#4
no surprise, its not like there are many companies who can handle a statewide system anyway. the 800lb gorilla wins again.

This is why im ok with Motorola but i like to see BK radios and Unication make products as well.
 
Joined
Sep 8, 2002
Messages
2,433
Location
Florida, where you wish you were!
#5
I used to be Moto Fanboy No. 1. These days I don't care quite so much. I'm familiar enough with all the major players that I can work with any of them. They all have their strengths and their weaknesses.

I view competition as a good thing. It makes each vendor try to make a better product.

However, when Harris bought out the GE legacy business, they bought ownership of the rolling disaster that is OpenSky and some of the liability for it as well. Their correct response to that should have been to put a total end to OpenSky (I or II) and convert those systems to P25 as a matter of standard policy.

Motorola never managed to make a blunder that was as large, notorious, and damaging as OpenSky was.

Engineers will always design a full coverage system and recommend it.
Salesmen will always try to sell that to their customers.
Their customers will always have their beancounters protest the price.
Compromises will always be made that lower coverage, performance, and price.
The system will be installed and the customer will be unhappy with the coverage when it turns out to be no better than demanded by the amended contract specifications.
Lawyers fight over the scraps.

That's how this industry works.
 
Joined
Jan 20, 2010
Messages
359
Location
Generally Central Florida
#6
Prediction: Unless the coverage requirement is altered, and more sites added to improve coverage, having this contract would be a trap for any company that gets it.

If an officer get hurt or killed because his portable radio won't work, 20 miles from the nearest tower site, guess who gets the blame? Never mind that at that location a mobile radio will work and signal coverage is exactly according to contract specifications.

It's a trap!
I wouldn't be surprised to see once all the litigation is done and they can move forward, Motorola contracting Harris to monitor the system and do service while they construct a brand new system. Been a long time but I believe that's what happened when ComNet Ericsson M/A Com whatever then took SLERS from Motorola. Like 1998 1999 timeframe. I had just finished classes in Schaumburg in order to maintain 18 to 20 sites on that system when Motorola lost the contract.
 

jaspence

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
1,701
Location
Michigan
#7
Michigan went Moto several years ago. The area where I lived spent almost as much putting up new towers as the original system. The real problem came a couple of years ago when Detroit had a major system fail and it took down surrounding areas.
 
Joined
Sep 8, 2002
Messages
2,433
Location
Florida, where you wish you were!
#8
Only time will tell how the logistics of this change will work out but since at least the P25 SLERS system that is still under construction IS compliant and interoperable with Motorola P25 equipment, then the State will probably allow, and even require, that Harris should provide support services to maintain the Harris equipment that is already installed, and much of it is rather new. Thus Harris will end up being subcontracted to Motorola for that purpose.

That seems like a likely prospect because ripping out new P25 infrastructure just to change the brand name on it, and at a high cost, doesn't make any sense to anybody.

I'm hoping that the response to the encryption/interoperability concerns is the simple and sensible one: Don't encrypt normal traffic.

Not going to bet a lot on THAT outcome, though.
 
Joined
Sep 8, 2002
Messages
2,433
Location
Florida, where you wish you were!
#10
I'm going to say without proof that nothing about the way the system operates is going to change. Same sites, same frequencies, same talkgroup IDs and allocations. Motorola will be tasked with making the system better and continuing with P25 buildout. Sites where new P25 equipment has not yet been installed will get Motorola rather than Harris equipment. When Harris equipment gets to the point that it is becoming a maintenance problem, at some point those sites will get a forklift upgrade. But that's going to be routine for years to come.

What interests me most is that this creates job opportunities for experienced Motorola techs, and if they have Harris experience too, that's all for the better.
 
Joined
Sep 8, 2002
Messages
2,433
Location
Florida, where you wish you were!
#14
You're closer to the truth than I wish was the case.

I swear, if given a choice between 80 percent coverage and full encryption to keep unauthorized listeners in the dark, and 100 percent coverage and no encryption, most agencies would opt for 80 percent coverage with encryption.
 
Joined
Nov 20, 2003
Messages
804
Location
Melmac
#16
Moto will do as they do on every contract..... Underbid to get it, then 'find' the gaps in the system and demand more money to fix it.... It'll be double the cost before they get done with it....
 
Joined
Sep 8, 2002
Messages
2,433
Location
Florida, where you wish you were!
#17
Harris does that too. But in this case, this award is in response to Harris being unable or unwilling to address issues that the State has wanted fixed.

I tend to believe that it's a matter of expecting more from the system than the performance the state has paid for. "It's broke, we don't have coverage HERE." "That's the coverage you're going to get out of this system. If you want more, it'll cost you more to put up more sites." "No, we think it'll work, you just don't want to do what we ask. We're giving up on you."

Probably.
 
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Messages
5,466
Location
In the 'patch
#18
If you want more, it'll cost you more to put up more sites." "No, we think it'll work, you just don't want to do what we ask. We're giving up on you."

Probably.
Not probably. Likely.

We have the exact same problem in Alberta. Harris 700MHz phase 1 trunk system with some sort of conventional P25 VHF system linked to the trunk system in the western portion of the province were 700MHz just won't with out dozens more sites, and in the north where there is extremely low population density.

System is spec'd for 95/95 mobile coverage on primary(1 and 2 digit numbered) and secondary(3 digit numbered) highways. They have also spec'd 95/95 portable on street coverage in 90? "urban" towns/cities. Currently the Government has spent close to C$400 million for 330-ish sites(largest P25 trunk system by site count and square kilometer covered in North America) just infrastructure for 95/95 Mobile coverage on primary and secondary highway coverage. Now a days everyone wants portable on hip coverage EVERYWHERE. I can not even imagine the cost to do that in Alberta. For size comparison Alberta is 661,848 km², the State of Florida is 170,305 km². We could put almost 4 states of Florida into Alberta. But we have 16 million less people than Florida in Alberta.

Problem is that they want EVERY first responder agency on the network. Between the cost of subscriber equipment, and the lack of portable coverage, rural volunteer fire departments are not interested because 95/95 mobile coverage just will not cut it for fire fighting. Most will have some sort of subscriber gear for 'interoperability' though.

There are already coverage complaints, due to some moron at our provincial EMS provider deciding that they were only going to purchase portables. Then they try and blame the system because the portables are not working everywhere. Our EMS provider does LOTS of inter-hospital transfers, from the rural areas to the 6 major metro areas.

Harris has built the system to spec, and coverage holes are not their fault, but the governments fault for taking the 'Participation medal' system, instead of the 'gold medal' system.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Messages
5,466
Location
In the 'patch
#19
Moto will do as they do on every contract..... Underbid to get it, then 'find' the gaps in the system and demand more money to fix it.... It'll be double the cost before they get done with it....
Do not blame Motorola for finding 'gaps' in coverage. Look at the contract specs, and listen to what the complaints about coverage are. It is not the manufacturers fault if the customer does not want to pay for portable coverage, then complains that there is no portable coverage.

My Provincial government originally wanted portable coverage everywhere(Gold Star system), but when they saw the cost for it, they bought 95/95 mobile on primary and secondary highway coverage system(Participation ribbon system) and there are already agencies complaining about coverage because they are only using portable subscribers.
 
Joined
Nov 20, 2003
Messages
804
Location
Melmac
#20
Do not blame Motorola for finding 'gaps' in coverage. Look at the contract specs, and listen to what the complaints about coverage are. It is not the manufacturers fault if the customer does not want to pay for portable coverage, then complains that there is no portable coverage.

My Provincial government originally wanted portable coverage everywhere(Gold Star system), but when they saw the cost for it, they bought 95/95 mobile on primary and secondary highway coverage system(Participation ribbon system) and there are already agencies complaining about coverage because they are only using portable subscribers.
I've seen system maps, estimated and 'tested' coverage...that are nothing like 'real' coverage.. Areas that were supposed to be covered well into the next county that weren't even covered in open water river that separated the counties...


I know of multiple instances where trunked systems 'went live', then immediately ordered to go back to 'the old channels', because coverage was so horrible...Systems that were using 100W mobiles on VHF added zero sites and went to P25 conv on their existing infrastructure using new 50W mobiles and didn't understand why they couldn't hit towers anymore.. Systems with 95% portable coverage using 6W
VHF portables, add a handful of 800 sites, give them a 3w portable, then wonder why their radio keeps beeping and showing 'out of range' in wooded areas that worked perfectly before.. The same wooded areas that comprise a good 35% of the county.

When these upgrades happen, I usually try to talk to the beat cops and the brass,to get their opinions, and they tell me they went with the system because motorola said they had to because of FCC requirements aka narrowbanding (not true) or that the radios were 'digital so no one could hear them'....Sorry, P25 IMBE vocoding is not encryption....nor is 2 slot TDMA..
 
Top