N
N_Jay
Guest
DickH said:
NO.
Only in the case when the previous "last word" is either wrong or stupid.
:lol: :twisted: :lol:
a $665 million dollar radio?
- Thread starter icom1020
- Start date
- Status
NO.
Only in the case when the previous "last word" is either wrong or stupid.
:lol: :twisted: :lol:
N
N_Jay
Guest
DickH said:
How? :wink:
DickH said:
Someone should check and see how many of these systems are actually OpenSky. From what I gather, LA is ASTRO, and so is Utah. Both NY and PA, however, are OpenSky. Ohio's system, MARCS, is, of course, Motorola.
Last edited:
N
N_Jay
Guest
mfn002 said:
AND; just because a company does work in the state does not mean they did the state system.
ChrisC2479
Member
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2005
- Messages
- 5
mfn002 said:
Actually, if you look at the statistics, the majority of new or proposed statewide radio systems are P25(either 9600 baud, mixed mode or conventional) including; Colorado, Montana, Wyoming, Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Utah, New Hampshire, Maine etc.
In the case of NY part of the system is OpenSky and part is actually P25 conventional in the VHF band.
Last edited:
ChrisC2479
Member
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2005
- Messages
- 5
OK, I'm going to try to clear up some of this misinformation,
The proposed statewide system is called the OWIN (Oregon Wireless Interoperability Network).
The agency responsible for developng it is the Oregon State Interoperability Executive Council or SIEC which was created in 2002 by exective order of Gov. Kitzhaber.
Their Mission Statement is:
"The mission of the Oregon State Interoperability Executive Council is to develop recommendations for policy and guidelines, identify technology and standards, and coordinate intergovernmental resources to facilitate statewide wireless communications interoperability with emphasis on public safety."
Organization:
"The Oregon State Interoperability Executive Council (SIEC), created by Governor’s Executive Order 02-17 in 2002, is charged with improving and developing interoperable public safety communication systems in Oregon. Through the Governor, its advisory recommendations will form public safety communication policy in Oregon.
Interoperability is an obscure label for the simple idea of providing for the ability for public safety officers and first responders to talk to one another, efficiently, timely, and effectively. The National Task Force on Interoperability defines interoperability as “…the ability of public safety agencies to talk to one another via radio communications systems – to exchange voice and/or data with one another on demand in real time, when needed.”
Improving public safety communication systems is important to saving lives and protecting property. That is why the work of the SIEC is vital to the citizens of Oregon.
The 17 voting members of the SIEC represent a unique partnership of state and local public safety organizations that have a strong interest in the creation and operation of public safety communication systems. All of these partners are working hard to deliver tangible results because they understand that weaknesses in the current communication systems compromise their individual and collective ability to protect the public, and they are committed to changing this situation.
The SIEC involves counties, cities, special districts, fire and law enforcement associations, 9-1-1 public safety telecommunciations, state agencies, the Governor’s Public Safety Advisor, and other people who are working together to create a blueprint for future communications coordination. It is the ability of these different groups to work together that will allow the full and successful development of wireless radio interoperability in Oregon.
This work will have two major benefits for Oregonians: 1) better service from all public safety agencies; and, 2) gains in efficiencies that will reduce redundant expenditures of taxpayer dollars. It will also benefit all of Oregon’s public safety professionals that may be called upon to put their lives on the line to protect the public. These primary benefits are the driving force for the work of the SIEC, and for its commitment to take action on priority issues for which they are responsible."
Some of the features of the statewide system will be:
"The architecture of the communication platform shall include the following elements
connected within a virtual private network:
1. Statewide basic infrastructure; (additional towers, microwave backbone)
2. Emergency communications virtual private network;
3. Statewide VHF P25 system;
4. Interoperability channel(s) designation(s) for VHF, UHF, 700 MHz, 800MHz;
5. Federal IWN system;
6. 700 MHz Data Network; and,
7. Public safety communications access for county, city, federal, tribal,
metropolitan and district communication needs.
8. The network basic infrastructure and communications equipment includes the
state operation of the statewide VPN."
Hopefully this helps clear up some of your questions, if you want more info the SIEC maintains a nice website at http://www.oregon.gov/SIEC/index.shtml
The latest info I have which is what the oregonian article is based on is that the system will be VHF narrowband P25 trunked. The reason for the high cost is 1. The state lacks existing adequate towers and other site infrastructure, 2. the state also lacks an appropriate microwave backbone, 3. they want to cover a large amount of the state, and 4. The geography of oregon, especially the coast range, require a lot more towers than typical "flat" terrain. I know someone used Utah as a comparison but remember that Utah's, system covers only 85% of the population and only one third of it's geography.
The proposed statewide system is called the OWIN (Oregon Wireless Interoperability Network).
The agency responsible for developng it is the Oregon State Interoperability Executive Council or SIEC which was created in 2002 by exective order of Gov. Kitzhaber.
Their Mission Statement is:
"The mission of the Oregon State Interoperability Executive Council is to develop recommendations for policy and guidelines, identify technology and standards, and coordinate intergovernmental resources to facilitate statewide wireless communications interoperability with emphasis on public safety."
Organization:
"The Oregon State Interoperability Executive Council (SIEC), created by Governor’s Executive Order 02-17 in 2002, is charged with improving and developing interoperable public safety communication systems in Oregon. Through the Governor, its advisory recommendations will form public safety communication policy in Oregon.
Interoperability is an obscure label for the simple idea of providing for the ability for public safety officers and first responders to talk to one another, efficiently, timely, and effectively. The National Task Force on Interoperability defines interoperability as “…the ability of public safety agencies to talk to one another via radio communications systems – to exchange voice and/or data with one another on demand in real time, when needed.”
Improving public safety communication systems is important to saving lives and protecting property. That is why the work of the SIEC is vital to the citizens of Oregon.
The 17 voting members of the SIEC represent a unique partnership of state and local public safety organizations that have a strong interest in the creation and operation of public safety communication systems. All of these partners are working hard to deliver tangible results because they understand that weaknesses in the current communication systems compromise their individual and collective ability to protect the public, and they are committed to changing this situation.
The SIEC involves counties, cities, special districts, fire and law enforcement associations, 9-1-1 public safety telecommunciations, state agencies, the Governor’s Public Safety Advisor, and other people who are working together to create a blueprint for future communications coordination. It is the ability of these different groups to work together that will allow the full and successful development of wireless radio interoperability in Oregon.
This work will have two major benefits for Oregonians: 1) better service from all public safety agencies; and, 2) gains in efficiencies that will reduce redundant expenditures of taxpayer dollars. It will also benefit all of Oregon’s public safety professionals that may be called upon to put their lives on the line to protect the public. These primary benefits are the driving force for the work of the SIEC, and for its commitment to take action on priority issues for which they are responsible."
Some of the features of the statewide system will be:
"The architecture of the communication platform shall include the following elements
connected within a virtual private network:
1. Statewide basic infrastructure; (additional towers, microwave backbone)
2. Emergency communications virtual private network;
3. Statewide VHF P25 system;
4. Interoperability channel(s) designation(s) for VHF, UHF, 700 MHz, 800MHz;
5. Federal IWN system;
6. 700 MHz Data Network; and,
7. Public safety communications access for county, city, federal, tribal,
metropolitan and district communication needs.
8. The network basic infrastructure and communications equipment includes the
state operation of the statewide VPN."
Hopefully this helps clear up some of your questions, if you want more info the SIEC maintains a nice website at http://www.oregon.gov/SIEC/index.shtml
The latest info I have which is what the oregonian article is based on is that the system will be VHF narrowband P25 trunked. The reason for the high cost is 1. The state lacks existing adequate towers and other site infrastructure, 2. the state also lacks an appropriate microwave backbone, 3. they want to cover a large amount of the state, and 4. The geography of oregon, especially the coast range, require a lot more towers than typical "flat" terrain. I know someone used Utah as a comparison but remember that Utah's, system covers only 85% of the population and only one third of it's geography.
Last edited:
mikepdx
Member
I follow other statewide systems with interest, having been
in the land mobile industry for several years.
One particular I watch is the statewide system in Colorado.
800 MHz in a state with 14,000 ft mountain peaks.
800 MHz = Pure lunacy.
The system went up in pieces as planned. Once "finished" in
one region, there are almost immediate outcrys for more sites
to fill dead spots. $2M here, $3M there - every three or four months.
It's become an endless money pit.
This is what I fear in our state. Once the old system is gone and
the new statewide infrastructure is there, and you find it's not working
as planned, you can't just throw up your hands and get rid of it.
You have no choice but to continually feed it cash until it "works".
I pray our Oregon decision makers note the blunders of other states.
We have one thing going for us: Time.
Perhaps other states are serving us right now as the "guinea pigs",
and Oregon will learn from their costly mistakes.
$665 million?
In my opinion, just another guess, but likely the closest yet.
Note: In November of 2002 this was published
in the b-Oregonian newspaper:
In Oregon, a 12-member committee of state and public safety leaders will meet for the first time today
to begin figuring out how to connect radios used by police officers, firefighters, the FBI, road crews,
foresters and others from Astoria to Ontario to Coos Bay.
Ken Murphy, deputy director of the Oregon Office of Emergency Management,
estimated the statewide project could run $100 million.
source: http://www.freqofnature.com/resources/digitalradio.html
(story in the scroll-box - original available at the archive of oregonlive.com for a fee).
In regards to what type of system this will be,
it would appear that it's almost a given
that it will be P25 -
Donald Pfohl, Oregon State Police, OWIN Project Manager
also holds the title of co-director of APCO's Project 25 steering committee.
He makes some interesting comments about P25 and Oregon in this article
from Mobile Radio Technology magazine:
http://mrtmag.com/mag/radio_finally_ps_year/index.html
(last half of article)
If anyone wishes to attend any of the monthly meetings of the
State Interoperability Executive Council, they publish their meeting
schedule at the SIEC site. Under Oregon's sunshine law, citizens
may attend these meetings except for those that are executive sessions.
You may or may not be able to speak. It's their perogative.
On the original OWIN thread at this forum:
http://radioreference.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53704
I posted some additional information about OWIN, gleaned from
the streaming video available at the SIEC site.
in the land mobile industry for several years.
One particular I watch is the statewide system in Colorado.
800 MHz in a state with 14,000 ft mountain peaks.
800 MHz = Pure lunacy.
The system went up in pieces as planned. Once "finished" in
one region, there are almost immediate outcrys for more sites
to fill dead spots. $2M here, $3M there - every three or four months.
It's become an endless money pit.
This is what I fear in our state. Once the old system is gone and
the new statewide infrastructure is there, and you find it's not working
as planned, you can't just throw up your hands and get rid of it.
You have no choice but to continually feed it cash until it "works".
I pray our Oregon decision makers note the blunders of other states.
We have one thing going for us: Time.
Perhaps other states are serving us right now as the "guinea pigs",
and Oregon will learn from their costly mistakes.
$665 million?
In my opinion, just another guess, but likely the closest yet.
Note: In November of 2002 this was published
in the b-Oregonian newspaper:
In Oregon, a 12-member committee of state and public safety leaders will meet for the first time today
to begin figuring out how to connect radios used by police officers, firefighters, the FBI, road crews,
foresters and others from Astoria to Ontario to Coos Bay.
Ken Murphy, deputy director of the Oregon Office of Emergency Management,
estimated the statewide project could run $100 million.
source: http://www.freqofnature.com/resources/digitalradio.html
(story in the scroll-box - original available at the archive of oregonlive.com for a fee).
In regards to what type of system this will be,
it would appear that it's almost a given
that it will be P25 -
Donald Pfohl, Oregon State Police, OWIN Project Manager
also holds the title of co-director of APCO's Project 25 steering committee.
He makes some interesting comments about P25 and Oregon in this article
from Mobile Radio Technology magazine:
http://mrtmag.com/mag/radio_finally_ps_year/index.html
(last half of article)
If anyone wishes to attend any of the monthly meetings of the
State Interoperability Executive Council, they publish their meeting
schedule at the SIEC site. Under Oregon's sunshine law, citizens
may attend these meetings except for those that are executive sessions.
You may or may not be able to speak. It's their perogative.
On the original OWIN thread at this forum:
http://radioreference.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53704
I posted some additional information about OWIN, gleaned from
the streaming video available at the SIEC site.
Last edited:
I'm bringing up an old topic because frankly...I'm confused.
I read a PDF on Oregon.gov (published April 2008) regarding the new 700MHz system that's currently being planned.
What I DIDN'T get was WHEN the system is planning on being built, how long it will take, and when we should expect (an estimate) to hear things.
Also, one thing I still don't understand about these "statewide" systems is whether or not this new system will replace ANY and ALL 800MHz, UHF, and VHF systems currently in place, requiring me to purchase a digital scanner (I was trying to avoid this on my limited income)...OR...it's just a "backbone" to connect everyone in the state.
Maybe it's just the late hour, and my brain can't process...but if anyone is willing to explain this, I'd appreciate it.
I read a PDF on Oregon.gov (published April 2008) regarding the new 700MHz system that's currently being planned.
What I DIDN'T get was WHEN the system is planning on being built, how long it will take, and when we should expect (an estimate) to hear things.
Also, one thing I still don't understand about these "statewide" systems is whether or not this new system will replace ANY and ALL 800MHz, UHF, and VHF systems currently in place, requiring me to purchase a digital scanner (I was trying to avoid this on my limited income)...OR...it's just a "backbone" to connect everyone in the state.
Maybe it's just the late hour, and my brain can't process...but if anyone is willing to explain this, I'd appreciate it.
In general, 700mhz won't be a backbone, there is microwave, etc for that.
- Status
Similar threads
