• 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

State of Nebraska Radio System RFP

Status
Not open for further replies.

starwtc

Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2005
Messages
121
Location
RGV, TX
After reading the link "Tower List & Frequency Plan"
I see that in our end of the state we could be in competition with South Dakota and Wyoming on frequency selection but I guess the ones who get the "big bucks" will figure that out in the next 10 years as fast as our state moves.

Mobile Radio Functions
Any one know what P 25 phase II is and does that mean another scanner purchase???
 

43g70

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2006
Messages
150
Not only that, the east side has Iowa on VHF to deal with. I am sure that there are some VHF user in kansas on the Border, not everyone has joined their state System.
 

KAA951

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
793
43g70 said:
Not only that, the east side has Iowa on VHF to deal with. I am sure that there are some VHF user in kansas on the Border, not everyone has joined their state System.
I don't see all the agencies in ANY state jumping on board a state system unless the legislature makes a law requiring them to move and gives them funding to do so.

Are there VHF-High channels specifically set aside for public safety trunking in the FCC plan?
 

NeFire242

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2006
Messages
1,528
Location
Nebraska
Im not sure what the reasoning for not joining such a system would be. There is a lot that can be gained from shared cost and resources to coverage. If I were paying taxes to a state with such a system than I would hope almost every agency or department would take advantage of having such a vast system at their hands.
 

KAA951

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
793
Reality...

There are many different reasons that local agencies are not eager to jump on board. Don't get me wrong- I am playing devils advocate on this one- I strongly believe in interoperability but the states building these big systems have many obstacles to overcome to convince local governments to buy into them.

Here are a few arguments against joining off the top of my head- and they don't count the uneducated and unreasonable arguments that can come up!

The first is- what we have now works, why should we change? We have done without this "interoperability" before and everything has works just fine. "It ain't broke- don't fix it."

The second is local politics- we have our own system, we control it, we maintain it- we don't want the state to tell us when and how to communicate. What if the state system fails- we still have to maintain our local system or we could be left high and dry if their high tech system goes down. Just another case of the state trying to tell us locals how to do business.

The third (and main one) is all about $$$- trunked radios are vastly more expensive then the conventional radios that many agencies- especially in rural areas- have been purchasing and using. For example, the county to my south can purchase a Motorola radius portable radio for $350 which allows them to talk to all the emergency responders in their county. If they want to step up to the state TRS- they can either shell out $1,837 under state bid for the base, 48 talk group, no-frills portable radio or up to $4,111 for the high end, 500+ talk group, encryption capable XTS-5000. Remember, many rural counties have $50,000 or less invested in their whole radio system!

And, do you really think the state is going to install enough tower sites to give the local agencies (especially fire departments) in-building portable radio coverage over the whole state? The state /NPPD will build a system that fits their needs (if you read the RPF you will see that local agencies aren't even mentioned) and down the road allow locals to join them. If past practice by other states as any indication- if you don't have the coverage you need the state will be happy to help you put up more towers- as soon as your city or county fronts the cash for the upgrade! In our state, each tower site costs between $750,000 and $1 million with construction, equipment and connectivity to the rest of the system.

Like I stated in my previous post- unless the state directs local agencies to join the system by law and attaches funds to bring them on board you will not have total buy-in.

Maybe Nebraska will be different- maybe you folks can be the exception to the rule but I seriously doubt it.
 
Last edited:

610

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
17
The Statewide system will ultimately consist of 3 components. First of all it is up to each county to determine the level of participation in the statewide mutual aid system. Notice I didn't say the "State" system, there is a difference. Counties is Nebraska have been required to form regions of common interest totaling 8 with the state listed as the 9th. Each region will decide how the statewide mutual aid system will be implemented in it's region, the counties will decide their level of participation. Here is how the statewide mutual aid system will be laid out, at this writing.

VCALL, VTAC1, VTAC2, VTAC3, VTACK4 = VHF Simplex Channels
UCALL, UTAC1, UTAC2, UTAC3 = UHF Simplex/Repeated Channels
ICALL, ITAC1, ITAC2, ITAC3, ITAC4 = 700/800MHZ Channels Simplex and or Trunked.

Various counties throughout the state will monitor 1, 2, or all the CALL channels and when a request for assistance or mutual aid comes in from another agency, state patrol or state agency the county dispatcher will advise assisting units to switch to a TAC frequency which will provide interoperable communications for that event. This is part one of the system.

Part 2 requires a databased interop software program which will tie in VHF/UHF/800/700 radios and in a sense "Cross band" them so everyone can use their existing radios/systems to communicate. Some regions will have more sophisticated cross banding or patching systems depending on the bands used or likely to be used in their region. Some may rely entirely on the TAC channels or use existing frequencies.

Part 3 will tie all dispatch centers together utilizing an IP based public safety only wireless system which will tie back to the database and interop software.

All of this is funded through Homeland Security funding with the exception of the "State System".

Nebraska is one of the first states to do this and many are looking to do the same thing. They're waiting to see how it works here.

Hope this helps
 

KAA951

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
793
Sounds similar to the system Kansas has installed in the eastern 2/3 of the state. Each of the KSICS tower sites has a VHF-lowband, VHF-highband, UHF and 800 repeater on the national mutual aid freqs.

http://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?aid=2669

The mutual aid repeaters are tied into the new state digital TRS with a motobridge controlled from the KHP Central Dispatch Center in Salina.

The plan is to place these systems across the whole state- and should be completed within a few years using the federal interoperability grant funds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top