I think there's a lot of romaticism for the Low band system, but there's really not a lot of net financial positives for the state when you're talking about the low band system versus the 700 system. And before everyone gets all up in arms, I'm a big fan of Low band stuff, but even I have to admit it's days are numbered. I think that it's going away in about 90% of the state that will be covered by the 700 system in the next 5 years, and in the remaining 10% of the state, in about 10 years. More on that later.
Think about it this way-
We're talking about fewer and fewer vendors that actually make low-band equipment = skyrocketing bids in the next few years.
Larger equipment (massive filters, duplexers, antennas) costs more and more in rack space real-estate at non-state-owned sites.
On the actual tower, those big low-band antennas take up quite a bit of tower space as well, costing quite a bit of money monthly at non-state-owned sites.
Parts are getting harder to find for the system, the remaining manufacturers of Low Band Equipment don't have the product stockpiles of parts like they once did (and supply chain issues are making it even harder). And that's not just a line from a manufacturer, that's a reality. Ask any radio technician who works on Low band equipment, they'll tell you that they love it, but it's difficult, or they hate it, because it's really hard to find parts or radios. It's just not sustainable anymore to have a radio system with a large portion made up of custom made or special order parts.
Not to mention the combined savings of shutting down redundant radio sites on two different peaks of the same mountain for 2 or 3 different state agencies. (Yes, that's a thing.)
Local agencies who use Low Band have dropped it for the same reasons. Lets be honest here, no radio system is going to cover 100% of the state, that's just not going to happen. However, the 700 mhz system CAN cover the majority of CHP's jurisdiction for mobile coverage. After all, CHP doesn't cover 90% of California. Nor do they require handheld coverage in their entire jurisdiction, we don't hold that standard to the Low band system, let's stop holding a brand new, not totally launched trunked system that's in its initial phases of installation to the same standard as a radio system that has been continually improved over 86 years, that's pretty unrealistic.
Are there remote CHP offices that will use Low band for a few more years until OES adds either adds more sites, or decides to add VHF high band sites. Probably. (By the way, there's nothing that I've read that excludes the possibility of adding VHF High licenses that the state already has to this system in some rural areas. Everything that I've read just says that they're using their 700 mhz license, but IMO there's nothing to stop them from getting another license for a particular area that's hard to cover, or acquiring a license from another agency that is joining CRIS.)
A great example of this is is the Pennsylvania PA-STARnet P25 Phase II system. It's a Tri-band system of VHF-High, UHF, and 7/800. Works well enough for them to have their state patrol on it, and it replaced a nearly useless open-sky system. Works seamlessly on a triband APX radio from some of the folks I've talked to out there. I drove through PA last month and was extremely impressed with it's coverage. Pennsylvania has a lot of rural areas with valleys, hills and mountains. Lets not pretend that California has the monopoly on difficult topography to cover either.
But back to the end user experiance for CHP. I wouldn't be surprised if we still have Low Band VHF on cars for another 5 years and the fancy in-car systems choose the radio it'll transmit on, based on whether it has good enough reception of the trunked system. (It's not hard to do, radios can be programmed to have a GPO indication when a trunked system is out of range.) It'll heavily favor the trunked system and once they find that they don't use the low band sites, they'll rip 'em out. I think it's going to happen a lot faster than people give OES credit for.
It's all fun and games to make fun of how slow things move in the state of California, and red-tape, and blah blah blah, but once sites start going in for these systems, it actually happens quite fast. I remember when EBRCS was approved and the vast majority of it was up and running within 5 years, and lets remember that Motorola did that build-out, not the local governments. When Motorola does these sites, it's like seal-team 6. If they have a crew that lollygags and holds up the project, they don't work with them long. Motorola can do 90% state coverage in 5 years as well. It's not the state's red tape that's holding this project up, it's most likely supply chain.
