I have to disagree on a few points...
Right now we have a large manhunt for a double killer here in Mendocino County, and we have local, state, and federal agencies taking part...and while clemar and calcord are VERY useful, we're assuming each agency is operating on VHF-HIGH...and IF an agency takes part that operates on UHF, and they don't have VHF-HIGH radios, and the host agency does not have enough VHF-High radios, it's a problem...at that point any "teams" would need 1 person from the local agency to handle comms with the home agency dispatch...
Sorry to hear about the manhunt. Hope they get a green light to send Mr. Bassler back to Jesus.
what you say is true about differing bands, visiting agencies and host venues when it comes to resources. I am afraid that is reality for agencies coming from distant locations to perform mutual aid or cooperative functions such as the search you alluded to. Resources are always a problem.
So the big gorilla in the "interoperability" room (issue) to me is VHF-Hi versus UHF...
I agree.
And don't forget some depts are using analog comms, and some are using p25...
Spot on you are my friend.
In certain conditions Clemar & Calcoord work good, sometimes no everybody can use it...
Indeed, this is true also.
Yes, Fire "White" was mandated as a Fire-MARS channel, but with more sophisticated radios CDF fire crews can often come up on a local freq if a Strike Team goes out of their home territory.
Yes, firemen have a universal mission and are easily loaned to another department under ICS who will pay all thier costs as long as the ICS benchmarkes are met...... Anyway, field programming 300 Bendix-Kings at a fire camp is a great idea and works for the fire service. Different animal than LE...FD deployment is generally controlled and far less dynamic than PD (2-in, 1-out, divisions, teams etc). Firemen have a valuable role but a different mission and the tempo, practice and needs of the way they respond allows them time to plan. Firemen roll Code-3 to everything and then walk in. Their role is clear, the enemy known, and the procedure well practiced and outlined. Additionally, Firemen travel in packs, are heavily supervised and tend not to act autonomously (2-in, 1-out; where the Captain).
Cops do not respond cookie cutter, every call is different- yet the same. One small detail can change everything. Multiple skills, rules, processes, policies and laws are all in motion at one time. Time is often not a luxury afford the street cop. The suspect may not be known, cooperative, or might be counter-surveiling you.
My whole point in this is the roles have different requirements. Cops need something where voice security could be useful but talking on a portable thru a Scott Air-Pak Mask may not be a big concern (unless you are Rohnert Park or Sunnyvale).
The biggest snafu is the CONTINUING problems with the Oakland PD comms system...even after the much touted complete radio revamping, they're still dead spots (in neighborhoods where loss of comms IS very critical)...
You tend to support my assertion here.....in the 80/90's OPD was on VHF (156.090/155.790). These two channels were repeated, voted, and used a GE Backbone. That system worked. Fire was on 153.7850 repeated, voted and also GE that system also worked. ACSO was on 154.6500, simplex, and that system worked. San Leandro, Hayward, Fremont, Union City, Livermore, Pleasanton, Contra Costa SO, Santa Clara SO, Solano SO, Vallejo PD, Napa PD/SO, even into to Lake County was available to any of these agencies as well as CHP (extender) all for the price of programming a Spectra. No one ever bothered. That is a pretty big area to operate in. Going into Marin County, SF, or San Mateo County would be a problem band-wise but historically that has not happened alot as I can recall from my experience.
In pursuits that left your jurisdiction and were anywhere near a CHP unit, CHP would generally offer to take over the chase with the agreement that everyone else would backout once there were two CHP units in the chase. Most agencies availed themselves of this. This would negate the need for direct comms.
So whats my point? Police agencies should concentrate on regional interoperability with those they most often play with and make that rock solid down to their training and corporate culture. Police agencues should plan their system acquisitions with this regional interop as a goal and not worry about talking to everyone on the face of the earth. You can plan must more readily on the regional level than trying to accomodate the entire constellation of possibilities.
There's been several incidents reported on the tv news in the SF Bay Area where comms failed...most natably the incident a couple of years ago where a parolee killed 4 PD officers in East Oakland...and there's probably more comm failure incidents we don't hear about...
I read the AAR on the incredibly tragic loss of the OPD Officers and did not recall that radio performance was raised as an issue. Communications were, but I believe that the finding was more command and control directives/info flo/who is in charge chaos related, rather than technical radio failure. Radio Interoperabilty per se was not even brought up as a factor. I just searched the AAR by Stewart on this event and found no negative mentions of radio. 'Radio system' does not even appear as a phrase in the AAR that I read. Perhaps there is another version that I do not have access to.
My Point here is that there were multiple agencies involved in this and very little to no interoperability yet it was not pinned as a problem despite an incredible number of law enforcement lives lost. Leads me to conclude there is no interest by command staff or the city attorney.
Beyond the barrier of mutiple bands being a problem in this dynamic situation (perhaps an ACU would have helped but there is that Law Enforcement vs. Fire luxury of time motif at play again). But for the sake of discussion, lets imagine that all agencies were able to talk in a single voice path and 'find interoperability'.
Now you have agencies talking to one another where just the difference in a radio code could get someone killed. Code-7 in OPD speak means "Armed Subject" which is frown upon as you might imagine, whereas everyone else means 'Lunch'. Also OPD 9-code, everyone else was 10/11 code with the exception of San Leandro PD.
My point again is there is just no palpable interest here. Police agencies view interoperability as loss of control and a civil/legal/policy problem. Really they only bang the gong for funding or when a bureaucrat wants some press/donation.
Some places are on the ball, San Mateo County is one that comes to mind. Countywide policy, Countywide mutual aid common channel, Countywide codes radio identifiers. They even used to train together a time or two a year doing scenarios etc. Why becuase the Chiefs took an interest and forced all to play together well and socialized this level of interoperabily.
If everyone took that tact then we would be miles ahead of the game.
PD's do not loan cops out like FD's do under ICS.
Each agency has its own custom & practice, culture, language, pursuit, use of force and other policies that can vary greatly from agency to agency.
Am I the only person that thinks the older analog systems, set up with different freqs & PL's for different zones, worked better than what we see now...???
Nope trunking is for system managers, not system users. What we see now is not the 'highest and best' use, it is the 'most efficient' use.
I get a funny look on my face now when I hear about "improvements"...
Me too Brother! Radio improvements are like the terms 'medical success' and 'justice'- it depends on who you are talking to.
and, lastly, I remember a sacto sheriff deputy (who like me is also a ham radio op) came up on our freq to tell us to continue up 1 block and turn right to get to the HEART of an incident (we were given a bad address)...that saved us valuable time...
I dunno who 'our freq' is and therefore cannot comment but glad to hear you made it to your call in a timely manner.
And to say that up into the 90's that there was NO need for interoperability in the SF Bay Area indicates a possible memory lapse about the Loma Prieta quake in 1989...
I was working the street as a Police Officer in the East Bay on October 17th 1989 so I can speak to that. I never said need, I said want. There is a regional need, but the want has never been there. See my comments above.
personally I see both need AND hype surrounding the issue of interoperability...
Compounding the issue is that in the last 25 years there have been MANY advances in radio technology, and with so many agencies using different systems, coming up with ONE STANDARD might be near to impossible unless there is a massive revamping of everybody's radio systems, which I just don't see happening...every agency is territorial in their radio turf and individualistic in how they configue tham...sometimes with good reason...
If you take that evil DHS UASI grant money P25 may be a requirement.
PS...I've NEVER heard a cop say they didn't want to communicate with firemen IF needed...
Heck i'll talk to a dogcatcher if it makes my job easier. The cops' mission is different, his/her role is different and his/here needs are different. Rarely have I ever had the need to talk directly to a Firemen running into a burning building; cops tend to stand around outside and create a perimeter for the firemen to run over their own hoses and spray that special type of fireman adrenaline all over everything.
How would it look for a cop to be in the middle of the new station 11 t-shirt; not good I assert.
Really, what does a cop have to say to a Battalion Chief at a structure fire? Not much. The Fireguys do not want to know that 3L31 needs a box of flares or to take a leak while the fireguys save a foundation.
There are moments, times, incidents but they are few and far between, unusual and can be worked thru without a $4 trillion dollar trunking system that tries to be all things to all people.
Cops ideally want a radio that works when they are rolling around on the ground with a bad guy.
Firepeople want a radio that works thru an Scott mask next to a noisy but well shined truck.
Interoperability should be planned for on a regional basis, like your situation in Mendo. Sounds like there is plenty of VHF on scene there........there was just no interest in getting together before this happened. There is a whole stack of VHF IOP channels available in the DHS NIFOG.....but no one had the interest to program, deploy, train, or policy up on them? Sounds like a lack of interest to me.
Tomorrow, Mendo will cry for a new radio system in the name of interoperabilty, yet the answer is already available.
See, its really about money and control for LE. For Fire it is about money then interop.
This drama might not actually have anything to do with real life...YMMV
