Douglas County MotoTRBO

[MTS2000des]

I heard from a very reliable source that Douglas county S.O. is making the smart migration to VHF MotoTRBO around the 1st of the year. I notice their license was modified in March of last year to add the emission designator for digital (11K1F1E) but this emission designator is for single carrier/non-TDMA digital emission such as NXDN, P25 phase 1, etc:

ULS Application - Public Safety Pool, Conventional - 0005692679 - DOUGLAS, COUNTY OF - Transaction Log

I did see a DCSO car today and indeed, gone was the XTL5000 W3 and was an XPR5500. Did not see the officer himself/herself. Anyone know the timetable for the buildout and what they will be running as far as TRBO (single site conventional, connect plus or capacity plus?)

Guess the "easy scan it" days are over. But DCSO is in desperate need of a new radio solution that gives better portable coverage. Hopefully, the new system will be a multi-site connect plus/capacity plus so they actually have a reliable radio system.

 

[K4SVT]

Not sure why they cant join cobb county p25 system as Douglasville city did...

Sent via LG G2 on Sprint 4G LTE Spark

 

[K4SVT]

But were you the one that said TRBO Radios are not made for the public safety environment?

Sent via LG G2 on Sprint 4G LTE Spark

 

[SkiBob]

Their radios are certainly sounding different. The burst tone at the beginning of the transmission is a confirmation that they have newer radios.

They tried to get funding for new radios about a year ago and were told no. After the public found out they were building a $1 million sign in front of the new jail, they were shut off. The sign is still sitting unfinished. The public doesn't trust the Sheriff with taxpayer dollars. I am curious to know where the funds are coming from. Drug money? Grants?

MTS2000des, thank you for the information. Keep us posted on any other insider information you get.

 

[MTS2000des]

I noticed too, that their MDC1200 ID's and preamble length had changed. When I actually saw a DCSO car with an XPR5500, it was confirmation of what I have been hearing. Previously, most cars had either XTL5000 W3 or Kenwood TK-790s and whatever else they could scrape up.

Remember with these corrupt local governments, all one has to do is follow the money. Look at Cobb county. $397 million dollars for some race to waste stadium that no one who actually LIVES HERE wants, yet CCPD has one highest attrition rates of any metro Atlanta county agency over the past 3 years. I certainly can't blame them for leaving, lowest pay, ever increasing call volumes, and little benefits when other agencies like Brookhaven, Milton, Johns Creek and Sandy Springs offer premium pay, take home cars, all the extra jobs one could ever want, and all new equipment. No brainer.

But it's all about priorities. Douglas county is our neighbor to the southwest and the same carcinogenic disease that is corruption seems to be rampant there. I recall when the sheriff asked for new patrol cars a couple years back, he was declined. The story about the million dollar sign is very perplexing considering the sheriff is always complaining about being underfunded. Guess it's more of the Race to Waste.

I am not sure about the funding source for the new radios. I do know that the same sheriff has been vocal about the existing radio system performance, or lack thereof, since the repeater was narrowbanded last year. That system has always had coverage problems for portable radios. When you look at the repeater location, it's easy to see why. I do not see any remote RX sites nor does it sound like a comparator is in use. A single site repeater cannot cover such a large area as Douglas county without a simulcast transmitter and remote receivers, analog or digital.

Hopefully, their MotoTRBO system will be a Capacity Plus/Connect Plus buildout with mutliple sites so they get the portable coverage they desperately need. I know they explored the possibilities of joining both the Cobb DTRS and WARRS, but the cost of the radios, takgroups and per unit subscriber fees made that impractical and exceeded the cost of improving their existing system by going TRBO or NXDN by far.

Not everyone has the fat wallet that we have in Cobb county, which is much thinner these days. Guess Tim Lee will fix that...BOHICA!

 

[K4SVT]

Not trying to intrude your post but at once were all the metro counties going to a metro atlanta trunking system...and i still dont get why cobb picked to microwave with forsyth...

Sent via LG G2 on Sprint 4G LTE Spark

 

[RRR]

A MotoTrbo system does not need to have "Capacity plus" or "Connect plus" capability to have a multiple site ("IP connect") Mototrbo system, nor do they affect portable coverage....

 

[MTS2000des]

A MotoTrbo system does not need to have "Capacity plus" or "Connect plus" capability to have a multiple site ("IP connect") Mototrbo system, nor do they affect portable coverage....

Oh really? So a single site repeater has just as much coverage as a multi-site IP connect cap plus/connect plus? You really think Douglas county can get by with a single site TRBO repeater?

Interesting.

 

[K4SVT]

No...i stand corrected..

Sent via LG G2 on Sprint 4G LTE Spark

 

[RRR]

Oh really? So a single site repeater has just as much coverage as a multi-site IP connect cap plus/connect plus? You really think Douglas county can get by with a single site TRBO repeater?

Interesting.

The "Coverage" of the transmitted signal is no different with IP site connect as it is with Capacity/connect plus.

"IP site connect" usually has more than one repeater.....

If you are speaking of amount of "Capacity" of the system, then yes, Cap/Connect plus will give them more Capacity. But you stated "Coverage"

 

[MTS2000des]

The "Coverage" of the transmitted signal is no different with IP site connect as it is with Capacity/connect plus.

I did not intend to imply that coverage is different in that respect. I meant to imply that they NEED a multi-site solution, and that a single site repeater, whether it be analog, TRBO, P25, NXDN, or whatever is insufficient for their needs. Would you agree or disagree?

"IP site connect" usually has more than one repeater.....

Yep, but do you think a few linked repeaters will be adequate for the DCSO? That essentially is one wide area channel, 2 talk paths max, if they don't use the other time slot for data. My source says they are getting an enhancement to their cars for AVL that is not cellular based. A major CAD upgrade is also in the works. This is all speculation on my part, but if their AVL is not using a cellular based solution, and that TRBO is in the future, that it most likely will be on whatever system they implement.

If you are speaking of amount of "Capacity" of the system, then yes, Cap/Connect plus will give them more Capacity. But you stated "Coverage"

My understanding is they need both. I guess I should have been more clear in my original post. Coverage is their main concern, but right now they only have a single wide area channel. They use talkaround on the repeater and have a secondary channel for tactical stuff. Simplex. During the recent incident at one of their high schools, their system quickly becomes overrun with users.

Do you have any information on their upcoming system changes?

 

[JRayfield]

Another option that they now have, with either IP Site Connect or Linked Capacity Plus, is the use of Satellite Receivers (voting in the repeaters). The voting system for MOTOTRBO works extremely well and is a great way to increase portable talkback coverage without having to have more frequencies for more repeaters (assuming that the repeater talkout coverage is sufficient).

John Rayfield, Jr. CETma
W0PM

I did not intend to imply that coverage is different in that respect. I meant to imply that they NEED a multi-site solution, and that a single site repeater, whether it be analog, TRBO, P25, NXDN, or whatever is insufficient for their needs. Would you agree or disagree?



Yep, but do you think a few linked repeaters will be adequate for the DCSO? That essentially is one wide area channel, 2 talk paths max, if they don't use the other time slot for data. My source says they are getting an enhancement to their cars for AVL that is not cellular based. A major CAD upgrade is also in the works. This is all speculation on my part, but if their AVL is not using a cellular based solution, and that TRBO is in the future, that it most likely will be on whatever system they implement.



My understanding is they need both. I guess I should have been more clear in my original post. Coverage is their main concern, but right now they only have a single wide area channel. They use talkaround on the repeater and have a secondary channel for tactical stuff. Simplex. During the recent incident at one of their high schools, their system quickly becomes overrun with users.

Do you have any information on their upcoming system changes?

 

[MTS2000des]

Another option that they now have, with either IP Site Connect or Linked Capacity Plus, is the use of Satellite Receivers (voting in the repeaters). The voting system for MOTOTRBO works extremely well and is a great way to increase portable talkback coverage without having to have more frequencies for more repeaters (assuming that the repeater talkout coverage is sufficient).

John Rayfield, Jr. CETma
W0PM

It's too bad that option requires an entire XPR repeater station to be configured as a receiver only or this would be even more affordable. The user ends up paying for half a radio they will never utilize. Would be nice if a simple mobile like an XPR4550 with an interface kit could be used instead to keep the cost down versus a full blown base station at each RX only site.

Guess it's no different than how they sold the MTR2000 that way.

 

[JRayfield]

MTR2000's were available as receiver-only models. And now, MTR3000's are available that way too.

Yes, it would be wonderful if there was a receiver-only version of the XPR8400 repeater. But the voting option (software in the repeater) is so inexpensive, as compared to a Raytheon/JPS analog voter, that it's still not bad having to use an XPR8400 as a receiver.

John Rayfield, Jr. CETma
W0PM

It's too bad that option requires an entire XPR repeater station to be configured as a receiver only or this would be even more affordable. The user ends up paying for half a radio they will never utilize. Would be nice if a simple mobile like an XPR4550 with an interface kit could be used instead to keep the cost down versus a full blown base station at each RX only site.

Guess it's no different than how they sold the MTR2000 that way.

 

[micco]

Good luck with the improvements... White county is having mountains of trouble with their TRBO system. They just disable the voice privacy on the FIRE/EMS side. Law enforcement is having coverage issues as well. Habersham has gone back to analog to the best of my understanding. TRBO regardless of what the salesman and motorola koolaid drinkers say is not suited for public safety.

 

[kayn1n32008]

TRBO regardless of what the salesman and motorola koolaid drinkers say is not suited for public safety.

That is the most uniformed statement ever. Poor networks is not a reflection on the technology, or it's suitability for a particular function.

I'm betting it is more an issue of not having adequate coverage, rather than the technology it's self.

 

[micco]

Say what you want, but hardly any one in white County is happy with the system. Be it lack of proper coverage or the product itself, it is not working. And you can argue until you are blue in the face, MotoTRBO was never intended nor designed for a public safety environment. I hear both sides of fire and LE complain about the radios failing in the rain. Motorola should have never allowed distributors to sell them to mission critical agencies. There WILL be a massive law suit sooner than later over these systems.

 

[JRayfield]

MOTOTRBO mobiles and portables are equal or better in specifications and durability as compared to the HT-series and CDM-series of radios that have been used for years in public safety systems with excellent results. No one has ever complained that these 'older' radios were "not designed for public safety".

Many, if not all, MOTOTRBO systems that do not work properly were not designed and/or installed/setup properly. I know this for a fact on numerous systems that I've personally looked at and worked on.

John Rayfield, Jr. CETma
W0PM

Say what you want, but hardly any one in white County is happy with the system. Be it lack of proper coverage or the product itself, it is not working. And you can argue until you are blue in the face, MotoTRBO was never intended nor designed for a public safety environment. I hear both sides of fire and LE complain about the radios failing in the rain. Motorola should have never allowed distributors to sell them to mission critical agencies. There WILL be a massive law suit sooner than later over these systems.

 

[N8IAA]

Good luck with the improvements... White county is having mountains of trouble with their TRBO system. They just disable the voice privacy on the FIRE/EMS side. Law enforcement is having coverage issues as well. Habersham has gone back to analog to the best of my understanding. TRBO regardless of what the salesman and motorola koolaid drinkers say is not suited for public safety.

Is Habersham using their deprecated 'old' VHF frequencies, or are they using new, undocumented, on RR database, frequencies?
Larry

 

[kayn1n32008]

Be it lack of proper coverage or the product itself, it is not working.

So you do not even know why the system is not working, you just want to blame the salesmen and the Motorola 'koolaid drinkers'

How about blaming the politicians that most likely underfunded the build out(happens all the time, resulting in a systems that lacks coverage.) A good example is my province. SOLGEN wanted a province wide 95/95 portable on belt system, but when they saw the price tag balked, and bought a 95/95 mobile primary/secondary highway coverage system... Difference? About 2 billion dollars...

Speaks volumes.

As for saying it is not mission critical, I contend the XPR 7550 is a better, tougher radio than the HT-750/1250/1550 series, and they have been used in public safety since they were introduced... Your argument does not hold water.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk