Draw backs of EDACS and Provoice vs Moto TypeII

[EMS12]

There seems to be a trend developing with municipalities percieved or otherwise that EDACS systems are not operating up to there expectations. The Auroa PD is just one example of many that I have read about. Sure there is your odd success story but it seems (At least to me) that PD and municipalities are not happy with EDACS be it pro voice or analog.

Why is this?. Is it flawed technology. Did M/A-Com only have there eye on the dollar sign and produce a crappy system?

What are some of the limitations you all are seeing with EDACS? I know the biggest for me is the control channel and how the EDACS network will not operate correctly if it can not hear the control channel 100%. The slighest interference between the control channel and the radio causes system malfunction. Dropped calls garbled speach and worst of all not being able to connect. I know with the state of Fl M/A-Com accuality had to ADD additional sites to get the same coverage as the Type II system already in place. This should have been a warning flag. Having to add additional sites to get the same coverage as a system that is already in place and working.


Why does this differ with Moto Type II systems that seem to be able to punch through the noise. I can key up a Moto Type II system in another county with my handheld running 5 wats. Where as with the EDACS system I can not running 25 wats on a mobile.

M/A-Com is taking a lot of heat from cities who were promised a robust redundant radio system that would deliver as promised. I don't know about you but I would not recomend a EDACS system to any one in its current form. Would you?

 

[northzone]

Did M/A-Com only have there eye on the dollar sign and produce a crappy system?

In all fairness Bryan, I think there are two sides to every story. If you read about Florida, after they had four back-to-back hurracanes go through they had nothing but praise for their statewide Macom system.

I think you are going to see Macom selling a lot more project25 systems and moving away from EDACS.

 

[EMS12]

Did M/A-Com only have there eye on the dollar sign and produce a crappy system?

In all fairness Bryan, I think there are two sides to every story. If you read about Florida, after they had four back-to-back hurracanes go through they had nothing but praise for their statewide Macom system.

I think you are going to see Macom selling a lot more project25 systems and moving away from EDACS.

I agree beacuse Project25 is open source and is much more robust. The big word around town is interoperability. At least with Project 25 you get this. Provice you do not. It is system specific.

Fl is a nightmare when it comes to system interoperability. There are more systems in use in this state than I can count on 2 hands.

Lets hope your right

 

[northzone]

Actually, Florida is in the process of installing one of the most advanced inter-op systems in the nation. They will have 11 channels of interop statewide when the systems is built out (3 vhf, 2 uhf, and 6 in the 800 band). I submitted the interop plan to the database here but I don't know if it got posted. The systems uses MotoBridge technology based on VOIP.

 

[n4voxgill]

When bid documents require P25 Macom will bid P25, have no choice. But in non-bid situations they will continue to push provoice as non-scanable at a cheaper cost than encryption.

 

[EMS12]

Actually, Florida is in the process of installing one of the most advanced inter-op systems in the nation. They will have 11 channels of interop statewide when the systems is built out (3 vhf, 2 uhf, and 6 in the 800 band). I submitted the interop plan to the database here but I don't know if it got posted. The systems uses MotoBridge technology based on VOIP.

I read that too. But if they had gone with project 25 compliant systems to begin with (Moto Type II and the like) then there would be no need to install an additional inter op system at the tax payers expense. :roll:

This has seemed to have turned into a Fl spefic thread. That was not the intention. I would like to hear how other states are coping with there EDACS systems.

 

[northzone]

Interop really has nothing to do with p25 vs. typeII or LTR or whatever. Even if everyone had P25 trunked systems you can not just switch over to someones trunked system and start operating on it. Every individual unit must be preprogrammed into the database of that system or you are denied system access.

That is why the national interop channels (such as I-call and the I-tacs) are ANALOG FM, in fact the FCC even requires a common pl, 156.7. Any radio on that band with any type of trunked system can operate on the interop channels. Florida is taking this a step futher by having analog interop channels on the 3 most commonly used bands that can all be tied together via VOIP.

 

[EMS12]

Interop really has nothing to do with p25 vs. typeII or LTR or whatever. Even if everyone had P25 trunked systems you can not just switch over to someones trunked system and start operating on it. Every individual unit must be preprogrammed into the database of that system or you are denied system access.

That is why the national interop channels (such as I-call and the I-tacs) are ANALOG FM, in fact the FCC even requires a common pl, 156.7. Any radio on that band with any type of trunked system can operate on the interop channels. Florida is taking this a step futher by having analog interop channels on the 3 most commonly used bands that can all be tied together via VOIP.

Right very true.

But were kind of getting off target here. .

I know from personal experience that the EDACS system at least here in Fl is not as robust as the Moto Type II system that was in place. (I am talking State Wide). There are still many gaps in the system and even where they say there are no gaps there is. FHP and the MCCO are still having to use there old VHF radios.

Most of the MCCO officers I speak to quitley say they don't like it. While it survived the Hurricanes of last year it still is very buggy.

 

[Scan-Denver]

The rumor mill in Denver is interference with Nextell is the only problem the police and fire are having with their Edacs system.

They are also talking inter-operability with surrounding agencies - the Denver communications center will have control for the metro area. Haven't heard a target date yet, but that is the word.

 

[Mozilla]

I know from personal experience that the EDACS system at least here in Fl is not as robust as the Moto Type II system that was in place. (I am talking State Wide). There are still many gaps in the system and even where they say there are no gaps there is. FHP and the MCCO are still having to use there old VHF radios.
Most of the MCCO officers I speak to quitley say they don't like it. While it survived the Hurricanes of last year it still is very buggy.

However the Motorola System was incomplete and not covering the whole State, most of the west coast from Naples up thru the panhandle stayed VHF/UHF and low-band till the M/A Com system was put in.
The Motorola system covered the East and some of the central portions of the State and ending up losing the bid ( what a mess that was) to Com-net which then became M/A Com....
Now while coverage is good in Dade and Broward, the system which was not designed with full portable coverage, has dead spots from Palm Beach County to Daytona. This may not matter to a trooper or a compliance officer who spends most of their days on major roadways or outside, but the system is weak when you are portable and in areas involving dense building coverage, vegetation etc. There is a reason that State Forestry is still on VHF and its not entirely because of interoperability since many of the municipalities are also 800MHZ.
As to Pro- voice versus other forms of IMBE, i personally haven't seen any data or reports that indicates its any less in quality, signal coverage etc, if there is some info out there ...hopefully someone will point it out.
System issues..yes, I understand that it seems they have been having more issue with Wide-area coverage etc working properly, but I think you need to look at a case by case basis... on design, recommendations, cost cuts etc... I personally think the State should have been a VHF trunking system due to numerous factors... we'll see how well the Federal system does down here when its implemented. Isn't Coral Gables, Fl Pro-voice? I remember one of their guys being out at the training facility for Metro-Dade and having no trouble talking back and the audio was good. System design and not trying to trim the budget tree back plays into this heavily, that and allowing IT/IS people with no radio and mobile data experience to be the project managers or developers.. plus a few over zealous sales people...

 

[EMS12]

Why do you think this is?

Is it just me or does it seem that Moto TypeII Systems have a better coverage area than EDACS? (When it comes to serving wide coverage area customers) Is this a system flaw with EDACS and how it is networked and backboned?

I couldn't agree with you more on a VHF trunking network. The propagation of VHF alone would more than make up for any gaps in coverage.


Maybe all the percieved problems with EDACS is just that a perception. I really have no hard and fast data to back up what I am feeling only experience and what I see and hear. EDACS is nice for data but for voice and coverage it is lagging behing Moto Type II.

 

[bcradio]

The propagation of VHF alone would more than make up for any gaps in coverage.

Not always..

http://www.radioreference.com/modules.php?name=TRSDB&sid=2589

There have been some issues with our VHF Smartzone system, mainly coverage in downtown areas. Lot's of garbled tranmissions, failures to access the network, missed calls, etc... Not just digital either, the Victoria Fire department has had issues too.

Not to minimize these issues, but there could be a training issue involved too. You'll often see police officers talking on their portables with lapel mikes, the radio on their hips and the antenna tucked neatly away under their armpit (remember, these are long VHF helicals.) And they're wondering why they can't access the network sometimes. I know the Motorola radios are much more robust than our little ol' scanners, but that has got to affect their performance..
[/quote]

 

[EMS12]

The propagation of VHF alone would more than make up for any gaps in coverage.

Not always..

http://www.radioreference.com/modules.php?name=TRSDB&sid=2589

There have been some issues with our VHF Smartzone system, mainly coverage in downtown areas. Lot's of garbled tranmissions, failures to access the network, missed calls, etc... Not just digital either, the Victoria Fire department has had issues too.

Not to minimize these issues, but there could be a training issue involved too. You'll often see police officers talking on their portables with lapel mikes, the radio on their hips and the antenna tucked neatly away under their armpit (remember, these are long VHF helicals.) And they're wondering why they can't access the network sometimes. I know the Motorola radios are much more robust than our little ol' scanners, but that has got to affect their performance..

[/quote]

True not always but if compared to 800mhz propragation it would :wink:

 

[bcradio]

True not always but if compared to 800mhz propragation it would Wink

Yep! Gawd, if our system was 800 MhZ, that would really suck! VHF sure does go far though. I've had reports that our VHF control channels are audible from as far away as Seattle.

[/quote]

 

[poltergeisty]

I want to know why the -FCC- here in the USA has allowed the use of 800 MHz?

I definitely agree on the propagation characteristics of VHF and UHF. I think Los Angeles might just be one of the most flawless systems in the US.

http://www.radioreference.com/modules.php?name=RR&aid=37

Could the draw back to Pro voice be at a technology point. Maybe Moto type II's technology is better in handling traffic. I don't know?

I'm curious as EMS12 is at this dilemma. :wink:


Boo!-Poltergeisty :-0

 

[MASTRTECH]

I,m not going to bash any system. I can only speak from my experience about my ProVoice EDACS.

I am the System Manager, Technican, (Bench and field) for a Sheriff's Office. Myself and one other person handle all maintenance for our system.

This system covers 990 square miles. The terain consist of pine trees,small cities, rolling hills and water. The system is an 8 Channel, Five site simulcast system and has over 1800 radio terminals. The system has been on the air for almost four years now and I have been very pleased with its performance. Coverage is 97% outdoors with a portable and mobile coverage is as close to 100% as you can get. Do we have dead spots? Yes, they are usually the same spots where cellular phones and Nextel does'nt work. I don't believe any radio system can boast 100% coverage.

I believe our system works well because it is maintained well. (I don't mean to brag). System and user preventitive maintenance tasks are performed regularly. Unfortunatly, Most systems are maintained by local radio shops. They just don't, from our experience, take the time to do it right. This system has never failed and our users can and do count on it.

Now, Lets talk about M/A Com. Parts and tech support are lacking. Why? I wish I knew. I don't know if the other manufactures are the same. If I may suggest to other system owners. Hire quality techs and do it youeself. A trunked Radio system is only as good as it is maintained.

Interoperability! The greatest scam in public safety radio. When we licensed our system, we were mandated to construct all five mutual aid repeaters. Our surrounding 800Mhz systems either don't or won't program these channels into their radios. If they would, we would have interoperability.I have links to Astro Digital, Smartzone and smartnet systems along with VHF & UHF systems. These links work well but, nobody will use them. They just complain that we have a disparate radio system.
Interop- Everybody wants it but nobody will use it. Enough said.
I,m sure there are alot of other opinions out there but, that's how I see it in the real world

Rick

 

[EMS12]

Excellent Post Rick.

That was what I was looking for.

But your EDACS system covers 990 square miles. The State of FL system covers 10 times that.

I guess when you look at in that term coverage is not to shabby.