Longmont facing major radio decisions

Status
Not open for further replies.

jimmnn

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 11, 2002
Messages
14,370
Location
Colorado
Publish Date: 3/1/2007

City facing major radio decisions

By Trevor Hughes
The Daily Times-Call

LONGMONT — The city is facing a tough choice over how to best upgrade the radio system that police officers and firefighters use to talk to each other and their colleagues at other agencies.

Consultants have recommended the city spend $5.9 million to join a statewide digital radio system used by Weld and Larimer counties, the Colorado State Patrol and many Denver-area agencies.

But buying into that system would mean Longmont police officers would have a harder time talking directly to Boulder County sheriff’s deputies.

And city emergency communication managers are loath to give up that capability, or even to tinker with it.

“There are a lot of things we’re going to have to decide before we figure out what way we’re going to go,” said Bill Scott, the city’s emergency communications manager. “You’re looking at humongous costs.”

The federal government is pushing public safety agencies to do a better job of using radio systems that can communicate with each other. The push came, in large part, because New York City firefighters and police officers rushing into the collapsing World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001, were unable to warn each other of the danger.

Colorado saw a similar situation during the 1999 Columbine High School shootings, when police officers from all over the Denver area raced to the school only to be unable to talk directly to each other.

In light of that problem, the state created the Digital Trunked Radio System, DTRS for short, and began pushing local departments to join.

But Boulder County has no immediate plans to join, largely because the county’s current system works better in the mountains than the relatively new DTRS.

Boulder County’s decision not to make the jump immediately is forcing Longmont officials to think hard about their options.

Scott, a former deputy police chief, knows how important it is for police officers to know their colleagues are only a radio call away. Today, city police officers can talk directly to any Boulder sheriff’s deputy because they all use the same kind of radio.

“There is a tremendous amount of value placed by the officers on that alone,” Scott said.

The statewide system uses a totally different type of radio. The current Longmont and Boulder systems can be “patched” into the state system, but that requires the aid of a 911 dispatcher. It’s not as fast as simply talking into the radio.

But Longmont’s current radio system has its own problems. The city has not spent any significant funds over at least the past 15 years to make it work in all of the new large buildings around Longmont. Additionally, police officers and firefighters are covering a physically larger city, and that requires upgrades to radio antennas and transmitters.

Longmont began reviewing its radio system after police and firefighters began complaining about communication problems.

Consultants found that police officers and firefighters “daily” have problems communicating with each other and with dispatchers, and the problems “endanger these city employees and the general public.”

While the consultant, Federal Engineering Inc., did not identify specific incidents, police officers point to Jan. 10, 2005, when a drunk, suicidal woman in the LongView Estates mobile home park shot at Longmont police officers and Weld County deputies. Though the subdivision was in Weld County, Longmont officers who were called in to aid their Weld County colleagues ended up shooting and killing 61-year-old Dianne Carlsten.

In the aftermath, officials acknowledged difficulties in dealing with the situation because Longmont police couldn’t talk directly to Weld County deputies. They use different radio systems and frequencies.

“Several recent incidents revealed these gaps to be problematic, and they will likely become more prevalent or cause more critical situations,” the consultants said.

They also said the city could also upgrade its current system. Either option will cost millions, but the consultants recommended joining the statewide system as in investment in the future.

However, a digital radio for the DTRS system can cost up to $4,000, while the radios used by Longmont police cost about $400.

That’s one of the main reasons Boulder County Sheriff Joe Pelle is reluctant to jump onboard with DTRS.

Boulder County uses the exact same radio system as Longmont does, and officers and deputies regularly monitor their respective channels in case of emergency.

“I see and feel a tremendous amount of pressure from the state and federal government to change,” Pelle said.

Unlike Longmont police, Boulder County deputies work mostly outside. The county also has upgraded its system over the years, to the point where the radios work poorly in only a few isolated places, such as South St. Vrain Canyon.

Pelle said he’s aware that Longmont is considering moving to the state system and said he’s planning to resist making such a move anytime soon.

“It works, and it’s paid for,” Pelle said of the current Boulder County system. “I’m in no huge hurry to replace it, and I’m not going to throw it out at this point.”
 
Last edited:

Moosemedic

Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2003
Messages
216
Location
Denver
Is it just me, or has no one realized that you can trunk VHF?

The state of Alaska has figured this out, so has New Hampshire. In both states you have distances and mountains like we do, and the technology works just fine. Further, smaller agencies did not have to throw away perfectly good pagers and radios on VHF.

:confused:
 

scanlist

Scanning since the 70's to today.
Joined
Jan 20, 2002
Messages
2,110
Location
Greeley, CO
DTRS coverage in Longmont is currently pathetic at best even with Mead and Gunbarrel sites. It took almost 2 years to get it to work worth a damn here in Greeley. Longmont's terrain isn't much better.

If they think they have problems with VHF they'll love 700/800 DTRS.

Consultants lean more times than not with higher cost alternatives,

Phil.
 

MMIC

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Messages
442
Location
Inside of the circuit....
Yep, but good luck getting enough VHF frequencies in the area to do anything with.

Pagers are out the door with trunking. In order to keep pagers working, they would have to do what a bunch of agencies (e.g. Golden, North Metro, etc.) are doing and multiselect the old VHF or UHF frequency with their primary 800 MHz talk group.

Do keep in mind that 800 makes up for the free space losses vs. VHF due to better matched portable radio antennas and lower noise floors across the band (except near cell sites ;) ). I would fathom to say that 800 MHz would actually do better in the mountains because the band allows multipath much better than VHF, which could get RF into valleys where VHF may not. Side-by-side real world comparisons that have been run here in Colorado have shown that 800 MHz matches, or beats, VHF portable radio coverage.

On another note, Longmont would likely go with 700 MHz for what would probably be a simulcast system.
 

k0pwo

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
454
Location
Centennial Colorado
I realize that LPD, BCSO, BPD and all the FD/EMS dept up in that area rely on pagers, but why. All the LE units there have mdt/mdc in the vehicles now don't they. So why really do they need to rely on pagers anymore. I know for ems and fd it is handy for the address to be paged to them if they don't carry mdc. But if they were to go to a dtrs trunking system whether it was vhf/uhf or 800/700 the radios now days all have the capability of receiving text messages on the screens of the radio. So I don't see the pager issue being a relevent argument for dropping vhf in that area.

At some point in time, Boulder county will become part of the dtrs system. And I agree with earlier comments made in other threads that this dtrs system in my opinon should have been built on 150mhz freqs. True when it was designed there were not enough freqs available in the vhf spectrum to build the system, but I think if engineers had wanted to truly build the best system for the state they would have done whatever it would take to allocate freqs in the vhf spectrum to build system.
 

scanlist

Scanning since the 70's to today.
Joined
Jan 20, 2002
Messages
2,110
Location
Greeley, CO
MMIC said:
Yep, but good luck getting enough VHF frequencies in the area to do anything with.
Hasn't stopped anyone in the area yet. BFD had no problems for their new fire channel assignments. Narrowband you know.

MMIC said:
I would fathom to say that 800 MHz would actually do better in the mountains because the band allows multipath much better than VHF, which could get RF into valleys where VHF may not. Side-by-side real world comparisons that have been run here in Colorado have shown that 800 MHz matches, or beats, VHF portable radio coverage.
"Aw geez not this........ again".

MMIC said:
On another note, Longmont would likely go with 700 MHz for what would probably be a simulcast system.
Yeah VHF is crowded etc etc but there's so much 700 real estate out there that we have to resort to 700 simulcast sites? Sorry Aurora and Thornton aren't impressed with it.

Phil.
 
Joined
Mar 17, 2004
Messages
493
Location
Longmont, CO
If the case were to happen where the county would go digital, theres no reason the county would get rid of there alpha paging system. That systems uses a seperate vhf freq from the dispatch vhf freq. The paging system is very important to the about 23 fire/rescue departments in the county since most of them are rural volunteer departments. But also like mentioned before the county could also simulcast the main fire channels to vhf so departments can continue to use station paging as well as voice pagers.

As for Longmont every pd vehicle has a computer mdc and now the fire department has toughbooks for their vehicles available but I have heard that many of the engines leave them at the station since all they are really used for now are patient reports. So in the future they have other options to use other than the paging system.

Boulder fire also has the option of not using the paging system since they already use mdc's to get calls off the CAD and to status themselves with the CAD computer in dispatch
 

olddog1

Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
1
Can anyone give me the digital freq for douglas county sherriffs colorado. I have a digital trunking unit pro-96. I am new at this and want to pick up the hobbie. I do not understand how to use it. I have tried for months to figure this out. I even went to the Radio Shack where I bought it and they have no clue as to help me.

Thanks in advance!

Olddog1
 

jimmnn

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 11, 2002
Messages
14,370
Location
Colorado
olddog1 said:
Can anyone give me the digital freq for douglas county sherriffs colorado. I have a digital trunking unit pro-96. I am new at this and want to pick up the hobbie. I do not understand how to use it. I have tried for months to figure this out. I even went to the Radio Shack where I bought it and they have no clue as to help me.

Thanks in advance!

Olddog1

Welcome to RR Colorado Forum, I can't even remember when my first post was.

First off you might want to start a new thread with this message, but go to the Radio Shack in Parker and they can surely help you with programming.

It's more than just a digital freq you need, starts with a control channel(s) for your area start off with Castle Rock, Franktown and maybe a few others depending on where in the county your located and then you'll need the system id's or referred to as talk groups (TG's) for DCSO.

That information can all be found in the database section here on RR or flash programmed to your radio immediatly using a software program like win96 or better yet be sure to attend the scanner meeting in Parker on April 1st and you will not only get free programming but also some pretty decent east coast pizza as well.

Jim<
 
Last edited:

MMIC

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Messages
442
Location
Inside of the circuit....
the radios now days all have the capability of receiving text messages on the screens of the radio.

Some systems do, but the release of ASTRO25 that DTRS is using right now does not support it. It will also require additional back end equipment to service the messages, and feature purchases in the radios.

but I think if engineers had wanted to truly build the best system for the state they would have done whatever it would take to allocate freqs in the vhf spectrum to build system.

I really do not think that VHF is a great band of choice, especially when the requirement includes portable radio coverage. All engineers know that portable radio antenna efficiency in the VHF band is less than adequate, which is why most won't recommend VHF when portable radio coverage is included in a bid specification. UHF or higher frequencies are a more balanced choice for RF propogation and portable radio antenna efficiency. 800 MHz is certainly pushing the threshold, though.

On Boulder, both the sheriff and police have grant requests in for portable and mobile radios to use on DTRS
 
Last edited:

MMIC

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Messages
442
Location
Inside of the circuit....
Sorry Aurora and Thornton aren't impressed with it.

Aurora's issue is not with simulcast or how digital modulation behaves in the RF environment. There are other issues going on that have created their problems, and these issues have absolutely nothing to do with digital simulcast.

I don't know the details of the Thornton problem, but Motorola has tens, possibly hundreds, of digital simulcast systems deployed across the country and I have yet to hear of problems with a system simply for the fact that the modulation is digital and the RF is simulcast. The methods of simulcast have nearly been perfected, and most (if not ALL) of the issues in systems is with the land-based hardware, not the RF.
 
Last edited:

Thayne

Member
Joined
May 1, 2002
Messages
2,145
Since its' Friday nite I don't have time to explain and extrapolate much, but it tends to get deep on the Colorado forum when the subject matter pertains to which bands are the best for whatever; and it gets REALLY deep when the subject is digital simulcast systems.

Nothing worth getting excited about though.

Like Phil said, Dogs still chase cats--
 

n4voxgill

Silent Key
Joined
Dec 15, 2000
Messages
2,588
Location
New Braunfels, TX
the federal government will give away a billion dollars by mid summer for upgrades to interoperability systems. agencies that can put together a plan and get it submitted ASAP may well get some big dollars. if they talk for 3 or 4 months it will all be gone.
 

jeffreyinberthoud

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Oct 18, 2001
Messages
1,880
Location
BERTHOUD COLORADO
I spoke with a Man in the know >>>>>>>>>>>>>.(and thats all I can say about that)

He tells me they have "several " "800" handhelds they are already experimenting with
He does not think they are going to the DTRS system but a seperate Boulder county 800 system (Yes I thought that sucked also) He will be giving me more data soon as the y are having a meeting on this thursday or friday.

Ill post when he tells me..........................
 

scanlist

Scanning since the 70's to today.
Joined
Jan 20, 2002
Messages
2,110
Location
Greeley, CO
Must be a different Boulder County this source is talking about since they are very hardcore about VHF and reject the ridiculous cost of digital 700/800 equipment.

You might want to ask this source why the city setup a VHF LTR system that sits idle.

Phil.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top