• 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

Trinidad, CO - Colorado statewide radio system causing static

Status
Not open for further replies.

Thayne

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 1, 2002
Messages
2,129
I thought everyone knew that digital radios can't have "static" :p
 

N0GTG

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 4, 2003
Messages
352
Location
Denver, Colorado
Sometimes i wonder maybe if more repeater sites would help in the mountains.
You're right, more repeater sites would help most systems. However, there is seldom enough money available to do that. Too often, systems are built on the basis of 'what will work', rather than 'what is best'. After a system is built out and users find out the weak areas, there probably isn't enough money to add to the system or make changes.
 

ScanWI

MN & WI DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Feb 6, 2009
Messages
828
Location
Wisconsin
I see so many 800Mhz Statewide systems, yet the VHF Statewides systems seem to be working alot better. The equipment is also cheaper and many of the radios already owned by counties will work on the systems.
 

letarotor

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
728
Location
Arlington, TX
Media "Sky is Falling" Hype

Another amazing bit of media “Sky is Falling” hype!!!

Static??? I’ve never heard “static” on the DTRS. I’ve heard a lot of blips, chirps, burps and Donald Duck sounds - but never “static.”

I often wondered why they didn’t put the DTRS Raton Pass site on the top of the mountain above the border where there are a plethora of other radio towers? Duuh, of course it won’t cover across the border down into Raton or to the west across the range of mountains the site is located! The article also failed to mention that there is about five or six radio manufacturers who sell radios capable of transmitting on the system, all of which are considerably less expensive than Motorola units and just as dependable.

Mark
 

PJH

Global Database Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
3,478
I see so many 800Mhz Statewide systems, yet the VHF Statewides systems seem to be working alot better. The equipment is also cheaper and many of the radios already owned by counties will work on the systems.
Cost of the equipment itself is typically the same reguardless of the band being used (or within a few dollars or so).

Other bands may have better propagation at times, but the higher up you go, the more capactity you achive for larger systems.
 
Joined
Aug 21, 2011
Messages
38
Selling Price

List price is one thing, but do you know the selling price of the Motorola equipment sold to the state? I am sure there was a specification published for the desired equipment and if others met the specs, they could have bid. This was a large project and few manufactures could provide the equipment, parts, service, and backup for a system like this. Motorola is very good in providing a system with support. I read all 3 Denver Post articles regarding Homeland Security spending. The state purchased 5 $338,000 mobile command posts which don't go anywhere, 2 snowcats, hazmat trucks that don't go anywhere, and best of all a 5th wheel trailer for a remote sheriff's department that they only use during hunting season. Of all the equipment purchased, it seems that the radio system is one of the few things that is used every day and it works. As most of you readers on this blog know, the media loves to jump on a radio system story. It's a very competitive business. This article didn't find much to crow about. The article focuses on one rural county and the radio coverage of that county. It is a very large rural area. It can be covered by the new system when the system is built out. Cellular operates on 800 Mhz all over Colorado. There will always be dead spots with any radio system. No radio system offers 100% of the area coverage, 100% of the time.

When cellular was first introduced, you could only use it in the metro areas. One carrier concentrated on large cities while another concentrated on the interstate highway system. They provide city coverage as well. As an example, once you left Denver on I-70 for Kansas City, you were out of range for most of the trip. Over the years, the system was built out and now you can use a portable cell phone in your car and have coverage all the way. Yes, it cost money.

Colorado moved forward with a statewide system, and in my opinion, has one of the best in the country. An article on this forum says that plans for a national emergency radio system still languishes in congress. How long will that take? What will the design look like? Good for Colorado.
 
Joined
Aug 21, 2011
Messages
38
Missouri's new radio system

I understand that Missouri is installing a new Motorola trunked radio system. Kansas City is in the process of changing out their EDACS system for a Motorola P-25 system. The state's system ,as I understand it, is VHF trunked. The metro areas use 700/800 MHz. trunked. I understand that Missouri troopers wil use Motorola radios that feature 136-174 Mhz, 380-470 Mhz, and 700 to 800 Mhz trunking for use in the metro areas. Power up to 100 watts in VHF and UHF. All of these radios are capable of conventional or trunking operation, encryption, and the multi band operation. Do they cost more. Of course they do. Do they do more. Of course they do. Millions of dollars are spent on R&D in order to provide solutions to some of the interopertability issues we face today. Somebody has to be the bell cow and spend the time and money to develope new technology.
 

SCPD

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
65,126
Location
Virginia
Interoperability doesn't have to be expensive

If each agency is satisfied with the coverage their system provides on a daily basis then it would be much more economical to utilize mobile cross band repeaters to provide interoperability during the times it is needed. Example of this is when a city or county firefighter on an 800 MHz System needs to communicate with State or National Forestry Service personnel utilizing a VHF System. A good example of a very reliable cross band repeater is the Motorola GR300 Repeater Interface Kit, known as a RIK, (Motorola Part Number HLN3333) that costs less than $300 to purchase. The RIK will interface with multiple models of radios so an agency can have a VHF radio linked to an 800 MHz trunked radio and all the fire officer on the engine has to do is select the channel on the VHF radio he wants to link to a talkgroup on the 800 MHz radio then press the ENABLE button to patch the audio on the two radios together. We have five cross band repeaters available for use in our City one of which is installed in the City pickup truck that I'm assigned to drive. The cross band repeater in this pickup truck is equipped with a Motorola PM400 VHF mobile and a Motorola XTL1500 800 MHz mobile. This type of solution works extremely well because it allows the firefighters to take interoperability with them where ever they go in their vehicle regardless of whether they are within the coverage of their home radio system or not, plus they have it readily available without having to wait on a mobile command post to arrive on a scene equipped with an ACU-1000 or other type of expensive gateway, nor do they have to wait on a dispatcher to create a console or MotoBridge type patch. When the firefighters get outside the coverage area of one or more of the radio systems programmed into either of the radios they can simply select a VTAC or other VHF simplex mutual aid channel and cross patch to an 8TAC and they can talk to other firefighters using radios in the other band. Preplanning interoperability by agreeing on a predetermined communications plan is a must, but with this type of equipment available in a fire engine or police car it gives field personnel a little more latitude in how they can set up communications. Again, it is a great solution and it sure beats spending $3,000 to $7,000 per radio to replace three or four portable radios assigned to an engine, ladder truck, rescue or squad. This type of solution is also highly effective in law enforcement operations. A county just west of us has been using it for joint SWAT Team operations for years to allow their Sheriff's Department VHF radios to communicate with the Sheriff's Department SWAT Team members in an adjacent County that uses 800 MHz. I'm truly disappointed this type of solution hasn't really taken off throughout our nation instead of agencies being talked into purchasing multi-million dollar 800 MHz radio systems when the VHF or UHF radio systems they had provided excellent coverage and had a sufficient number of channels. I'm sure there are many other interoperabilty solutions similar to the GR300 out there, but this is one that I have personally had a lot of success with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top