Englewood PD back on VHF

[scanlist]

Hearing Englewood PD back on their VHF channels tonight.

Considering the FD did this a couple of weeks ago are they really having some serious issues with coverage in the city?

Phil.

 

[jimmnn]

Hearing Englewood PD back on their VHF channels tonight.

Considering the FD did this a couple of weeks ago are they really having some serious issues with coverage in the city?

Phil.

Friday 1530hrs and roll-call is occuring on DTRS.

Jim<

 

[cstockmyer]

As of last night they are still I can still hear them on my non digital scanner. Does this mean they are back? Or is the digital system just being worked on?

 

[jimmnn]

As of last night they are still I can still hear them on my non digital scanner. Does this mean they are back? Or is the digital system just being worked on?

Digital system is being worked on, seems like EPD is having lots of trouble. EFD seems to remain on DTRS.

Jim<

 

[RISC777]

I'm hearing them on both, TRS and VHF. Last night at least, locked 'em out on the VHF...going to unlock it and see what's what.

 

[luke-1]

Both PD and FD on VHF only Monday Morning

Luke

 

[luke-1]

PD roll call at 10:30 on DTRS

Appear to be back on DTRS for the moment anyway

Luke

 

[cstockmyer]

Is Englewood the only agency that is having problems with the new digital system? Or have others?

Charles

 

[DTRS_Master]

Is Englewood the only agency that is having problems with the new digital system? Or have others?

It's not so new in the Denver metro area, but the problems that agencies seem to experience is that they do not evaluate and/or test the coverage of the system in their jurisdiction BEFORE moving critical operations to the system, and then end up having problems. They get the new radios, program them up as fast as they can, then deploy them into the field without thinking about the rest of the puzzle.

 

[jimmnn]

Is Englewood the only agency that is having problems with the new digital system? Or have others?

Charles

Overall most agencies are happy Charles especially in the metro area but like anything the system does get overloaded at times and you will hear those comments and you "are digital" once in a while.

Remembering that most of the states largest cities are NOT on the DTRS yet. Namely Denver, Aurora, Lakewood, Boulder, Colorado Springs, Pueblo, Grand Junction and Durango. .

Jim<

 

[DTRS_Master]

Remembering that most of the states largest cities are NOT on the DTRS yet. Namely...<snip>...and Fort Collins.

Fort Collins is on DTRS.

I hear that Colorado Springs is on the way to being on DTRS, but won't join until they build out their 9600 baud infrastructure.

It seems that, in large, the cities that can afford to build their own infrastructure do, and the ones that don't seem to end up piggy-backing on DTRS.

 

[firescannerbob]

Fort Collins is on DTRS.

I hear that Colorado Springs is on the way to being on DTRS, but won't join until they build out their 9600 baud infrastructure.

True, but the state will also have to upgrade thier firmware to the same version El Paso County will have when they go to 9600 baud (the state will then be 2 versions behind, and incompatible). Lastest word here is that the CCNC has commited to version 7.X (I forget the exact number) BUT they don't have the $8.8 million it will cost, and don't know when they will have it. Down here we've been told to not expect to be folded into the DTRS "anytime soon".
However, it is expected that we will be able to access DTRS "mutual aid" (MAC?) TG's when we upgrade, but the rest is several years down the road.

 

[DTRS_Master]

True, but the state will also have to upgrade thier firmware to the same version El Paso County will have when they go to 9600 baud

It's a LOT more than just some firmware, but this is correct. At any rate, I think that in the future, more of the larger municipalities that have not already invested money in trunked systems will be coming onto DTRS - either "piggybacking" or by bringing additional infrastructure.

 

[firescannerbob]

I think that in the future, more of the larger municipalities that have not already invested money in trunked systems will be coming onto DTRS - either "piggybacking" or by bringing additional infrastructure.

I stopped into the Pueblo City radio shop last week, and indications there were that it's going to be about 2 years before they come on-line also. They're struggling with trying to keep the current VHF/UHF systems up and waiting to go digital.

 

[cstockmyer]

Any idea when and if Aurora might go digital?

 

[jimmnn]

Any idea when and if Aurora might go digital?

They already tried it once, so I would expect them to switch the provoice switch again sometime soon.

Jim<

 

[scanlist]

Well Englewood did switch during the winter and we all know what happens in the spring as in trees budding and vegetation returning. Historically causes interesting issues on 800 MHz in the field.

FWIW it only took 2 years for them to get DTRS working worth a damn in the city of Greeley. With Greeley falling back to UHF during those 2 years.

Locbuie PD currently has to repeat their radio traffic 2 to 3 times on damn near every transmission to where Weld dispatch gets enough info out of the digital garbage to make sense of it.

Dream on about BFD getting on the DTRS bandwagon.

Phil.

 

[jimmnn]

Wednesday 7am

EPD & EFD both back on DTRS this am, let's see how long it lasts bet those VHF radios won't be removed from the cruisers anytime soon.

Jim<

 

[k0pwo]

Regarding the el paso/springs system being upgraded here soon to 9600 baud. It seems to me that if the dsp versions are different from each other thus making the two systems incompatible then even the MAC channels would not work. The MAC tgs use the very same coding scheme etc as does the rest of the dtrs system. So if you can't use one talkgroup on the system then you will not be able to use any of the talkgroups on the system.

I think the rep was refering to the icall and itac channels for mutual aid since they are conventional and the trunking scheme does not effect that. The dsp version of the software has to do with the controller scheme and such and that is what is different between the two verisions. The dsp version is what will not allow the compatability between el paso/springs and the dtrs systems.

 

[captaincraig44]

Just a suggestion to move any continuing El Paso Co. discussion to a new thread to keep the subject lines accurate.