mr_hankey
Member
1) are any APCO-25 digital LTR systems in use in North America?
2) decodable with the current crop of digital scanners?
2) decodable with the current crop of digital scanners?
-
To anyone looking to acquire commercial radio programming software:
Please do not make requests for copies of radio programming software which is sold (or was sold) by the manufacturer for any monetary value. All requests will be deleted and a forum infraction issued. Making a request such as this is attempting to engage in software piracy and this forum cannot be involved or associated with this activity. The same goes for any private transaction via Private Message. Even if you attempt to engage in this activity in PM's we will still enforce the forum rules. Your PM's are not private and the administration has the right to read them if there's a hint to criminal activity.
If you are having trouble legally obtaining software please state so. We do not want any hurt feelings when your vague post is mistaken for a free request. It is YOUR responsibility to properly word your request.
To obtain Motorola software see the Sticky in the Motorola forum.
The various other vendors often permit their dealers to sell the software online (i.e., Kenwood). Please use Google or some other search engine to find a dealer that sells the software. Typically each series or individual radio requires its own software package. Often the Kenwood software is less than $100 so don't be a cheapskate; just purchase it.
For M/A Com/Harris/GE, etc: there are two software packages that program all current and past radios. One package is for conventional programming and the other for trunked programming. The trunked package is in upwards of $2,500. The conventional package is more reasonable though is still several hundred dollars. The benefit is you do not need multiple versions for each radio (unlike Motorola).
This is a large and very visible forum. We cannot jeopardize the ability to provide the RadioReference services by allowing this activity to occur. Please respect this.
APCO-25 digital LTR?
- Thread starter mr_hankey
- Start date
- Status
N
N_Jay
Guest
mr_hankey said:
To my knowlege there are no P25 LTR systems. (would be hard sice LTR required subaudable data and P25 is not set up to send it)
If there are none, testung a a scanner would be REALLY hard!
mr_hankey
Member
hm, i remember a recent news entry (Summer 2004) talking about a new EF Johnson radio and/or Kenwood radio meant to work with LTR that utilized a form of digital communications...
probably just the way it sends data, not voice.
oh well.
probably just the way it sends data, not voice.
oh well.
mr_hankey
Member
here we go:
i guess i saw "EF Johnson" and immediately thought LTR...
Code:
Washington, DC – October 14, 2004 -- EFJ, Inc. (NASDAQ: EFJI) announced that its EFJohnson subsidiary has received additional orders totaling $1.5 million from the United States Air Force. Under the orders, the company will provide Minot AFB in North Dakota with its Project 25 portable and mobile radios.i guess i saw "EF Johnson" and immediately thought LTR...
N
N_Jay
Guest
mr_hankey said:
EFJ is a big supplier of P25 subscriber equipment.
Yep EFJ does make P-25 system compatable equipment for use, but as of yet doesn't have P-25 LTR yet,.... They do have an Encryption Module for LTR, and are researching a form of digital for LTR, but none out yet, thank god lol.... If there is one made, I would suspect it to be a Multinet LTR since there is a CC type format for that.
N
N_Jay
Guest
milf said:
I would think the actions of EF Johnson, and Transcript are not the same.
Ef Johnson seesm to be firmly behind P-25. I don't know if they do anything with LTR other than support their old MultiNet customers.
Transcript makes encryption modules for many systems, but that does not turn them into P25 radios.
Hmmm they still support thier invention-Logic Trunking Radio aka LTR. They are still the primary supporters of Standard LTR Systems, and Multinet LTR Systems,.. though the Passport type is now supported by many others-most noticably Tait. They are always researching how to improve thier own stuff, as well as how to best support other formats for interop,.. something all the big players need to be doing. It stands to reason that since the big daddy is now digital in the P-25 format, they would look into ways to support P-25 or some form of digital for all thier supported systems/products.
N
N_Jay
Guest
milf said:
There are costs to supporting old technologies.
Looking at there product pages, they do have a few Multi-Net products, and they will do P25, so maybe their migration plan is to get the old customers off Multi-net and onto P25.
I would bet big $$$ against a P25 on LTR system being created.
With the phase in of P-25 on all formats,.. they would have to support some kind of LTR to P-25 format. LTR systems are becomming more widespread for PS Systems.
N
N_Jay
Guest
milf said:
I don't think so.
Show me a good reason why, or an indication sit is happening.
milf said:
I don't think so.
Show me a public safety agency that has moved to LTR in the last year or so.
If you find one or two;
Are they new systems?
What percent of new systems is that?
OK Simpson County MS E-911 is finishing construction of an LTR Standard VHF TRS, Buncombe County NC, is upgrading in the next couple of years to a combined VHF Conventional, with a UHF Passport LTR system.. There are probably others too.. but those are two right off the top of my head.
N
N_Jay
Guest
milf said:
Well I'll be a monkey's uncle!
Guess there is more business out ther for "good" communications consultants than I thought? :wink:
I guess if old technology with no road forward is what you want? :roll:
mr_hankey
Member
N_Jay, they're moving to LTR down here too - especially in the South Texas Valley (yes, Public Safety).
although i do have a feeling they want to get away from it, since it's mostly SO that uses LTR system, and one-channel LTR's are not that rare down here either!
however, LTR has TREMENDOUS support among the small-business type down here that don't like NextHell's spotty coverage and relatively-expensive 2-way plans...
Passport LTR is VERY big in Austin/San Antonio area.
although i do have a feeling they want to get away from it, since it's mostly SO that uses LTR system, and one-channel LTR's are not that rare down here either!
however, LTR has TREMENDOUS support among the small-business type down here that don't like NextHell's spotty coverage and relatively-expensive 2-way plans...
Passport LTR is VERY big in Austin/San Antonio area.
N
N_Jay
Guest
mr_hankey said:
I still stick by my original point, that you won't see P25 on LTR.
I would guess that a big driver to LTR is low cost.
They would lose that if they went to P25. (even if it was on LTR)
grem467
Member
yeah there are TONS of UHF commercial LTRs around here, even one or more on 900.
oh yeah and the county to the south of me has all their public safetly/local govt stuff on an 800 Multinet.
ironically, there are more LTRs than Type IIs, and only one edacs and its that ESK enabled statewide system.
oh yeah and the county to the south of me has all their public safetly/local govt stuff on an 800 Multinet.
ironically, there are more LTRs than Type IIs, and only one edacs and its that ESK enabled statewide system.
mr_hankey said:
Hello,
P25 has data stream formats but I doubt they would use it for a LTR type system. It already has a trunking format.
73 Eric
I totally agree. P25 LTR is an oxymoron. To adapt P25 to LTR, regardless of who goes to it and how soon, you have to totally redesign LTR to support them both together. Sub-aud and P25 digital don't mix.N_Jay said:
Why any public safety agency would go to standard LTR is beyond me. APCO-16 compliance is the minimum for a trunked system to be used by public safety. I believe Multi-Net follows APCO-16 guidelines though.
-Wayne
DaveH
Member
wayne_h said:
My thoughts also, I was scratching my head over why these two would be considered together. LTR is pretty old, and the best I see is patchwork features added such as VI scrambling (I wouldn't call this "encryption") and ANI using FleetSync or other format.
LTR in great for small (footprint) site systems; very channel efficient, simple and multi-sourced. There is slow/steady increase in UHF LTR usage here, and an explosion of commercial VHF LTR across the river in N. NYS (150-154MHz). Nevertheless it remains poorly suited for large agencies especially public safety.
Dave
Hmm why LTR? Cheaper, easier to use. LTR regular can be upgraded and workable with Passport LTR. Another reason,.. to be unique and not on the same system as everyone else. Yes in these days when everyone should wise up and all be on the same page for interoperability, there are agencies that are stuck on the mentality of "I will not have to be like you". But in a few years, those not on the P-25 compatable systems, or not getting P-25 compatable systems, will have to give up on the "I am not gonna do it" mentality and get onboard or be alone when they need help. Its the ultimate peer pressure: "We are all using an interoperable system, your still alone, would you like to jump on?" The days of politics over reality are slowly dying, and the politicians don't like it too much. But untill that magic day its a political decision, and as such, the wanna be dictators will have thier way. ** All politicians are not this way, but there are still plenty of them out there.**
- Status
Similar threads
