New State Standard for EMS Mobile Radios

Status
Not open for further replies.

joetnymedic

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
740
Location
West Haven, CT
#2
so much for the way things used to be set up. guess i'm gonna have to reprogram my scanner plus talk to a couple of guys i know that are still in the field. actually, ems170 should be up on this. matt, care to chime in? are they even using any of these other channels?
 

cg

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 13, 2000
Messages
2,887
Location
Connecticut
#4
What a horrible document to be called a "Standard". It is merely a programming list and poorly done at that.
- They don't address time out timers, penalty timers, power output, etc, but hey, the antenna will be on the roof.
- Simplex for every channel in every region in a mobile unit?
- No reference to system use documents, for example every region seems to have different Unit IDs.
- No reference to out of state transports, Springfield CMED also has a UHF system.
- The learning curve of having to teach everyone Zones and Channels will be a pain
- Only one of the UHF UTAC/UCALL channels?
- It looks like the statewide PL is gone.
Pretty much par for the course from CT OEMS though.

chris
 

Lynch_Christopher

Member
Database Admin
Joined
May 28, 2006
Messages
765
Location
Bethpage, NY
#5
What a horrible document to be called a "Standard". It is merely a programming list and poorly done at that.
- They don't address time out timers, penalty timers, power output, etc, but hey, the antenna will be on the roof.
- Simplex for every channel in every region in a mobile unit?
- No reference to system use documents, for example every region seems to have different Unit IDs.
- No reference to out of state transports, Springfield CMED also has a UHF system.
- The learning curve of having to teach everyone Zones and Channels will be a pain
- Only one of the UHF UTAC/UCALL channels?
- It looks like the statewide PL is gone.
Pretty much par for the course from CT OEMS though.

chris
I also wonder if each town will have to pay for new mobile radios if they don't have enough space for the required zones or if the state is going to chip in some money for that, which I kind of doubt since the state is basically broke.
 

kmacinct

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 6, 2003
Messages
225
Location
Connecticut
#6
What a horrible document to be called a "Standard". It is merely a programming list and poorly done at that.

Pretty much par for the course from CT OEMS though.

chris

Based on some of the names of their groups and frequencies, I feel fairly confident that the document wasnt written by anyone at OEMS - it was given to them and they were told "Put your letterhead on the top of this". More then likely by someone from a commercial service.

So here's the magic question....

How do you (we/us) switch everyone over on the same day, date, time etc - CMed towers, field units, portable, command posts, MCI vehicles . . . .
 

ems170

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 10, 2004
Messages
240
Location
Connecticut
#7
Well I read the document over and CG is very accurate with his concerns. However these "standards" are not necessarily rule. In paragraph 2 it states

"
Connecticut Public Safety Interoperable Communications Executive Committee as criteria for approval of the use of federal Department of Homeland Security funds administered by the State for the purpose of​
purchasing mobile radios by or for EMS units in the State of Connecticut."

This would indicate in order for this group to purchase radios with grant money for departments these conditions need to be met. This has no governance over radios agencies purchase on their own. The programming scheme is a good suggestion with respect to standardizing cmed radio programming. However there are alot of issues which are either vague or exempt from this "standard"
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
9,971
Location
Taxachusetts
#8
I was thinking the same thing Chris. Not sure who/what animal created that document.

As for the STATEWIDE Tone, those are all [including Mass] going Bye-Bye, as they were created [showing my age] back when radios had a limited [12-16] set of frequencies vs now with 256+ and multiple Zones.

Many folks are going with Direct in the Radios. What no one has thought of was a Zone with a Reverse Pair [set up on a roof of the Hospital and act as the Hospital to hear the mobile units]

Time-out timers are important. Home or Emergency Revert to a primary channel. And as you pointed out, where is the Near-By States UHF info.

Mass has worked on one [thru a Region, not sure if it will become statewide, but....]

a.) Alpha Display [both 8 Character and 14 Character 2 Line displays
b.) Common Naming
c.) TX Power
d.) TX Deviation, to track Narrow vs Wide [for now]
e.) Emerg Revert
f.) ID [Ani] limited to MED 4
g.) DoS Mute
h.) No Scan Lists for a MED Radio
i.) Med 4 has a 15 Sec ToT
j.) All UHF Interop in One Zone
k.) Only MED 92 is Simplex



What a horrible document to be called a "Standard". It is merely a programming list and poorly done at that.
- They don't address time out timers, penalty timers, power output, etc, but hey, the antenna will be on the roof.
- Simplex for every channel in every region in a mobile unit?
- No reference to system use documents, for example every region seems to have different Unit IDs.
- No reference to out of state transports, Springfield CMED also has a UHF system.
- The learning curve of having to teach everyone Zones and Channels will be a pain
- Only one of the UHF UTAC/UCALL channels?
- It looks like the statewide PL is gone.
Pretty much par for the course from CT OEMS though.

chris
 

cg

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 13, 2000
Messages
2,887
Location
Connecticut
#9
From the document:
"In addition the Department of Public Health has requested that this standard be transmitted to them for use in establishing standards for required equipment in EMS Vehicles."

This would indicate in order for this group to purchase radios with grant money for departments these conditions need to be met. This has no governance over radios agencies purchase on their own. The programming scheme is a good suggestion with respect to standardizing cmed radio programming. However there are alot of issues which are either vague or exempt from this "standard"
 

garys

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 13, 2002
Messages
4,426
Location
Eastern MA
#10
There is not much, if any utility in having direct capability on the Med channels. Not to mention that the FCC might not allow that mode of operation on the Med channels. I doubt that this came from commercial services since I've never seen one propose something that is going to cost them money, which this will.

It looks like a plan to implement interoperability, much as MA is doing. As Bill points out, statewide PLs are a relic of the days when an 8 channel radio with a 2 or 4 PL accessory head was high tech. I used and repaired those radios, and still wonder at how much better what we have today is.
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
9,971
Location
Taxachusetts
#11
At this time, Correct. However one of the Templates being pushed out by DHS for Interop has Simplex as one of the models on each of the MED channels.

NIFOG Programming Guide

Seems the other URL's Dead End. I sent an email to Ross Merlin for follow-up on them.


There is not much, if any utility in having direct capability on the Med channels. Not to mention that the FCC might not allow that mode of operation on the Med channels. I doubt that this came from commercial services since I've never seen one propose something that is going to cost them money, which this will.

It looks like a plan to implement interoperability, much as MA is doing. As Bill points out, statewide PLs are a relic of the days when an 8 channel radio with a 2 or 4 PL accessory head was high tech. I used and repaired those radios, and still wonder at how much better what we have today is.
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
9,971
Location
Taxachusetts
#12
Joined
May 1, 2008
Messages
256
#13
We know who wrote it if its comming from DEMHS....Maybe someone who used to be at a C-med center?

Very short sighted, and if your going to do something with C-med combine them into 2 centers for the state and make them back to C-med only.
It says there are 13 C-med centers, Most are primary dispatch centers that also do C-med
except for Northwest, North Central, South Central and South West.
North Central does not do any primary dispatch and of the other 3 North West is the only one able to balance dispatch with C-med and make it work
IMHO South west could do it if they worked at it and South Central should close

They should try figuring out narrowbanding first as they list the 12.5 channels between the current channels as med 11, 22, 33 ect Can't use them as the system sits now
 

cg

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 13, 2000
Messages
2,887
Location
Connecticut
#14
Northwest is a dispatch center as well.
Northwest Connecticut Public Safety Communication Center, Inc.
I don't know about SC or SW but NC now does EMD for several towns which is time consuming.
In light of the push to reorganize the PSAPS and for regional dispatching, a complete overhaul of the radio system may be a bit premature. In my opinion, they would be best served to come out with a good technical spec for mobiles and portables for the departments that have to buy radios for narrowbanding. That way they can be ready for addressing reprogramming once the PSAP and regional dispatch dust settles.

chris
 

CT22

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Oct 9, 2003
Messages
184
Location
CT
#17
Yes, because its the right thing to do. It saves money and there is no reason for every little town in CT to have its own dispatch center.
 
Joined
May 1, 2008
Messages
256
#18
Is there a reason that dispatch duties are moving away from the local police departments to C-MED?
Moving to regional dispatch is a good idea,,, Using the C-med centers is a bad idea :confused:.

The entire state is bass ackwards on regional dispatch and always will be, everyone wants to be the boss.
Look at the eastern side of the state, KX, VS, WW, TN, QV....They all could combine and make a really good regional center...Noooooo,,, but some people would not be king of the center anymore so it doesn’t happen

If those centers really had smart people they would be combined already, but they are in the me me me, mine mine mine, mindset

Sad but so true
 

CT22

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Oct 9, 2003
Messages
184
Location
CT
#19
There are plenty of smart people at the regional centers in CT. There are several logistical issues that deter any more consolidation for some centers. Its not a prohibitor just a bump in the road. I wouldn't be surprised if it did happen down the road.

Be careful who you call stupid. There are a lot of people who work at these regional centers on this website. Get that straight a$$clown. Now go play with your scanner while they do the real work.

Signed
KX Employee 2000 to present
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top