All radio signals to go Digital??

[kd7rto]

The biggest problem with the digital modulation techniques currently available is that they are significantly inferior to analog in the receiving station being able to differentiate voice from background noise, in a high noise environment. This is particularly a concern for firefighters.

http://forums.radioreference.com/pr...port-digital-radios-extremely-vulnerable.html

By far, the main advantage of digital is spectrum efficiency. Cellular absolutely had to transition. The bandwidth that would be required to cater to society’s current demand with analog technology would be enormous.

The plan for the land mobile bands (google “refarming&#8221, was to cut the existing channels first in half, then into quarters. Phase 1 has already been implemented, and FM still works without noticeable degradation. Trying to cram FM into anything more narrow than this, though, does not work. That is why, rather than FM, they use variants on SSB in the 220-222 MHz LMR band, which the FCC created with channels just 5 kHz apart. And that is why we are seeing digital technologies such as NXDN and motoTRBO introduced in VHF and UHF for business users.

The day is certainly coming when the only signals we will be able to demodulate are those specifically intended for the general public to be able to hear, but since most people controlling the money can’t justify the expense of buying a whole new communications system, when what they already have suits their needs just fine, it’s going to be a while.

 

[kd7rto]

Another consideration specific to our location are all the nearby mountains for signals to bounce off. Anyone who has ever tried to receive OTA analog TV knows that Salt Lake City is the absolute worst place in the country for multipath.

Bring in a system developed by Motorola in the flatlands of Illinois, and you’re going to encounter issues they did not take into account.

 

[idontknow82]

Did I say that?


Sometimes, but really like the elegance of analog.


Where did I say that (again), but not anti government.
WTF does pro or anti government fit in this discussion anyhow?


Again, you are jumping to conclusions,


Put what in my signature?
Your asinine assumptions?


We could if you were rational, but that is not likely.

Well, speaking of unrational...it just seems you are siding with encryption.

 

[wlmr]

Another consideration specific to our location are all the nearby mountains for signals to bounce off. Anyone who has ever tried to receive OTA analog TV knows that Salt Lake City is the absolute worst place in the country for multipath.

Bring in a system developed by Motorola in the flatlands of Illinois, and you’re going to encounter issues they did not take into account.

Multipath is not a problem for some digital systems. Specifically, a large portion of metro Phoenix is covered by a few P25 digital simulcast sites that employ multiple transmitter sites simultaneously transmitting the same digital signal. Before you try to explain that away by saying the transmitter sites must be low power or something, consider this, they have helecopters operating just fine on the system receiving up to nine transmissions at once. You can't get much more multipath than that. Receiving analog simulcast in an aircraft would likely cause your ears to bleed from all the hetrodyne noise and picket fencing!

In regards to the way this discussion seems to be heading, remember this. Digital is NOT encryption. Digital can be encrypted, just like analog can be encrypted, but it can also be non-encrypted. The original poster was looking at a RS scanner that receives non-encrypted digital just fine. I expect that the best answer to the RS salesperson's "gotta buy this scanner right now" sales speech would be to walk out laughing.

 

[N_Jay]

Well, speaking of unrational...it just seems you are siding with encryption.

Where?

How so?

 

[KT7L]

Yes, yes, I know cost has been mentioned several times --- But damn, the rest of the discussion is pointless within the next ten years... The old push to digital is dead -- there's NO MONEY, and there won't be for a long, long time. For the next several years, public service agencies will be worried about staffing, and nothing else! (Anyone notice 140 agencies threatening to sue CA state over pulling money from the locals to pay for state debt?) 20+ states are in the same boat, to varying degrees -- new systems/growth just isn't going to be there!

I figure we'll be with the present systems for a long time -- though encrypted digital will come at the point that it is more cost effective -- probably not in my lifetime, though!

 

[Observer1]

Actually, you're somewhat incorrect.

There are dozens upon dozens of grants that allow for restricted spending, many of those grants are in the area of technology. It's much harder for departments to get money to fund staffing than it is to fund new toys and equipment.

 

[loumaag]

I have been asked to step in here.

idontknow82 and N_Jay:
Please both you stop addressing each other in this thread. If you want to have a discussion on who knows what, take it somewhere else. Either of you posting to each other in this thread will result in an infraction for failure to follow a moderator request. No last comment to each other; no discussion on DRM, analog audio tape, pro/con government, etc.; no further off topic comments are to be made.

 

[Rolfman]

I have to agree with KT7L. There are agencies in this state that are not willing to join UCAN let alone go digital and my guess is the number one factor is cost. Likewise there would need to be a lot of infrastructure added in the rural areas of the state to support a full state digital system like I listened to back east this week. It seems to me UCAN has the ability to support digital on their system if a user should want to go that direction. But even if the grants are out there either the jurisdictions don’t know about them or they are not interested because every other agency that can get their hands on “free government money” is doing it.

 

[Observer1]

Rolf...many of these grants are new, created with "stimulus" money....they're just starting to be awarded.

 

[N_Jay]

The stimulus stuff just added a new layer of grants.

The old ones are still going forward.

Except for tax revenue funded stuff, it seems that government spending has not slowed at all.

 

[KT7L]

I am sure there ARE grants out there, but you have to realise, most organizations recognize that a grant could put them in over their heads with longer-term operating expenses. There will always be exceptions, but most Utah agencies won't go in this direction.

Rolfman is correct -- UCAN could support it -- and would probably love it! It's a for-profit organization, I believe. I know my local county, Summit, won't move to digital -- They don't even like the price of the 800mhz Mot radios...

Anyway, my point remains -- State, County and local public agencies are going to be scraping for money for a very long time!

 

[Observer1]

KT7L ...I disagree, most agencies are applying for and taking every grant they can get. The operating costs are usually not the problem, it's the initial investment that is so prohibitive.

 

[ryanisflyboy]

Let me try to sum up (please feel free to correct me if you think I am off):

* Public Safety radio systems are moving toward digital (at what speed is up for debate).
* The time scale for digital adoption is dependent on 1) budget, 2) technology improvements, 3) spectrum efficiency.
* The time scale for adoption is highly debatable. Is it 10, 40, or 100 years away? Will something better come along sooner?
* The cost of digital radio systems is expected to get lower (and more capable) over time, as with other digital technologies.
* It is likely that as digital radios become more powerful the cost of encrypting digital signals will become cheaper.
* The rate of digital adoption is too difficult to predict right now, but it is likely that there will be more digital users on UCAN over the next decade.

How this affects the scanning hobby is too difficult to predict. As long as people are willing to buy scanners, manufacturers will build them. If the 'balance' of consumer purchasing is disrupted by new technologies, it may cause unexpected side effects for the scanner industry. This may reduce what new equipment is available to hobbyists in the future.

I think we are able to offer some answers to the original question: "Should you purchase a digital scanner for listening in Utah right now?" I think the answer depends. If you expect to be using that scanner for the next 10 years, then yes. If you expect to 'upgrade' at some later date (next 5 years), then you won't be missing much by waiting.

These are just my opinions, but curious to know what you guys think.

 

[Rolfman]

One of things I have wondered and never got around to asking.

We know as Ryan has surmised there are a lot of reasons but what of the technical? Do a lot of the rural agencies stick with the conventional systems because of the range as well? The 800mhz is nice on a urban setting but how does it translate for ability in some place like San Juan county or similar remote places? Again we know the cost keeps UCAN out of some of those areas but just what are the range limitations?

And in a sort of response to Ryan’s rhetorical question:

My thoughts are buy the best you can afford but never cheap out on anything with technology because you are already buying dated products when they hit the shelf.

 

[qlajlu]

There is no question that range is a consideration in an outlying area like San Juan County, but of higher importance in those areas is coverage. If range were the only consideration they would still be using low band. :roll:

One hindrance in those wide open spaces has been getting power to relay stations and intermediate transmitter towers. Cost of laying 50 - 100 miles of electrical line is not small especially if there is rough terrain to go over. Most of that type of problem has been answered by the advances of solar panels and storage batteries as evidenced by the continued improvement in cell phone coverage.

Many large public service agencies throughout the country have gone to P25 service. Those agencies will influence others to change. It may not happen in the next five or even ten years, but going completely digital in Utah will happen. Mark my words.

 

[N7YUO]

Currently Digital in our geographical area

A few select Talk Groups on UCAN
The four site system used by the Air Force locally
Bannock County, Idaho (Pocatello & Lava Hot Springs)
WyoLink in Wyoming digital VHF
National Parks such as Arches NP

As you look through the RR Database for different
states and locations, note how many systems are digital.
The number is growing.

When a public safety user decides it is time to upgrade a radio system, they will have to decide if digital will be worth the extra cost.
For example, how much radio traffic does Daggett County, Utah generate?
Will digital enhance their coverage, or about the same?
Do they really need the extra security of digital?
Frequencies in rural Utah are shared by multiple agencies. Going digital would require all users to make the switch.

My opinion is that switching to digital would increase cost with little improvement of performance. The radios are more expensive. The range of any radio is determined by
Effective Radiated Power (ERP) and terrain.
Example: I own an HTX202 ham radio. Max output is five watts. I can hit the repeater on Antelope Island easily. I can hear the repeater on Lake Mountain, but terrain usually prevents me from hitting that one with 5 watts. Using a fifty watt radio, I could hit Lake Mtn without a problem. If you take an existing system, and switch to digital, the performance should be about the same.

If you want to learn about the challenges of all digital, go to the Wyoming Forum and read all you can about WyoLink. As I recall, one of the challenges was making sure that fire departments could communicate effectively within buildings

Someone asked if more towers would be needed for digital. Remember, the local Air Force system covers parts of Weber, Davis, Salt Lake, & Tooele Counties with only four sites. An all-digital UCAN could be done with the existing sites.

 

[thewenk]

Not to hijack this thread, but for what its worth, Idaho hasn't seemed to be too concerned about putting digital in rural areas. So far in E. Idaho, the 700 digital system transmitter sites have been put in essentially the same locations as already existing vhf/uhf sites. The new part of the 700 system that is now coming on line covers from Idaho Falls north to Montana and East to Wyoming. Scanner Frequencies: Eastern Idaho Cooperative Agencies Wireless Interoperable Network (EICAWIN) Trunking System, Multiple Locations, Idaho

It currently has 12 sites, all of which are using previous site locations, some of which are in rather mountainous terrain. Since not very many users are online yet with this system, we'll have to see how good the coverage for this system is.

Also for anyone interested, I ran across some information on Utah's 700 MHz digital plan. This website has a copy of Utah's Strategic Plan as well as Utah's 700 Plan submitted to the FCC.

UWIN - Utah Wireless Integrated Network -

Region 41

http://uwin.utah.gov/700mhzrpc/700mhzrpcfiles/700 Plan Version 1.8 May 1 2005.pdf

Dave

 

[lndshrk]

Except for tax revenue funded stuff, it seems that government spending has not slowed at all.

Do we mention NOW or LATER that pretty much ALL "government spending" is "tax revenue funded stuff".



BTW - another point of order - there is no such thing as AES or DES anything w/ any 1024 bit key.

AES uses key sizes of 256, 192, and 128 bits

DES keys are 56 bits

Jim

 

[Observer1]

There are a lot of misconceptions about government funding.

For example, people think places like Utah State University and the University of Utah, as well as University Medical Center are awash in taxpayer money. They're not. Utah gets less than 10% of it's budget from taxpayer funds. Te Medical Center gets practically nothing.

Salt Lake City International Airport, no tax money. Salt Lake City Golf Division, no tax money.

Now, things like police, sure, it's funded by tax money, but what many don't realize is the money that's generated from traffic citations etc does NOT go back to the department, but rather goes to the general fund to fund other programs.

All that being said, government spending on a local level has decreased dramatically. Look no further than the news this past week that Salt Lake County is looking to cut another $15 Million, which may force the closure of Oxbow Jail again.

Salt Lake City went a full year without hiring a single police officer, the Utah Highway Patrol has been operating with many open positions for years now.

Spending has slowed quite a bit, especially in Utah, where less federal money is spent than in any other state.