Elyria fire chief urges radio upgrades

[RT48]

Elyria FD wants on the 5-City system.

ELYRIA — Elyria Fire Chief Joe Pronesti is hopeful for upgrades to the department’s radio system with support from Lorain County.

On Monday, Pronesti urged a vote by the Lorain County Board of Commissioners to utilize a portion of American Rescue Plan Act funds to get Elyria and other Lorain County fire departments on the L3Harris system.

On Saturday, Elyria firefighters responded with mutual aid assistance to a structure fire in Sheffield on Kevin Street and were unable to communicate with other departments on scene, creating a safety hazard that has been a persistent concern.

“My firefighters were called for mutual aid and they could not communicate with the Sheffield firefighters, or the Sheffield Lake firefighters. Out of all the fire departments that responded my fire department was the only fire department that couldn't talk to command or anybody, and that is about as dangerous as can be,” Pronesti said.

Elyria fire chief urges radio upgrades

Elyria Fire Chief Joe Pronesti is hopeful for upgrades to the department's radio system with support from Lorain County.

chroniclet.com

 

[LarryHarrisThe3rd]

I hear the commissioners are voting today to accept the contract from the local Harris shop to increase the coverage.

 

[Tim-Elyria]

Commissioners OK $4 million for L3 Harris emergency radio system

 

[rcid1971]

Commissioners OK $4 million for L3 Harris emergency radio system

I find it interesting in the article that they’re pushing the Cleveland Communications L3 system as working indoors, it’s also a pretty big knock on MARCS for crap coverage in the county.

 

[N8WCP]

I find it interesting in the article that they’re pushing the Cleveland Communications L3 system as working indoors, it’s also a pretty big knock on MARCS for crap coverage in the county.

There money would be better spent partnering with MARCS to improve coverage. Multiple TRS create interoperability issues.

 

[rcid1971]

There money would be better spent partnering with MARCS to improve coverage. Multiple TRS create interoperability issues.

MARCS is an absolute Money Pit.

$20/month, per radio

The Cleveland Communications system isn't even half that, and the county gets towers where they want them, not where Columbus wants them.

 

[N8WCP]

MARCS is an absolute Money Pit.

$20/month, per radio

The Cleveland Communications system isn't even half that, and the county gets towers where they want them, not where Columbus wants them.

I was addressing interoperability, not operating costs. Clearly you're not a fan of MARCS, but $20 a month is a reasonable cost to have access to a well designed and maintained system. Aside from Motorola monitoring and managing the system, there's network of Motorola dealers who take part in maintaining the system. I don't know the financials of the Harris system but I do know it relies on a single dealer to maintain and operate. That's a lot of eggs in one basket. For the sake of the Harris users, let's hope they're around to keep the system going.

 

[rcid1971]

I was addressing interoperability, not operating costs. Clearly you're not a fan of MARCS, but $20 a month is a reasonable cost to have access to a well designed and maintained system. Aside from Motorola monitoring and managing the system, there's network of Motorola dealers who take part in maintaining the system. I don't know the financials of the Harris system but I do know it relies on a single dealer to maintain and operate. That's a lot of eggs in one basket. For the sake of the Harris users, let's hope they're around to keep the system going.

There's pluses and minuses to each system.
You mention all the eggs in one basket that is a real danger, but it's also a danger with Motorola who has a history of ending their support for products fairly early, and forcing customers to newer, err...pricier, technologies.

MARCS impresses in their sales spiels and PowerPoints about their 24/7 network monitoring and management, but they continue to be non-responsive to coverage and security issues. Coverage complaints in Cuyahoga, Lorain, Medina and Portage counties continue as well as numerous other counties throughout the state. MARCS only tends to respond to coverage issues with knee-jerk tendencies after major failures. MARCS lack of day-one Link Layer Authorization led to a major security breach and criminal charges. Amazing that no one lost their job over that.

I also wouldn't want to be stuck on a system like MARCS where state agencies are prioritized over my agency in a catastrophic event, for much of Lorain County, they have a history of P25 simplex, so perhaps they'll keep those backups as a zone in their radios. Why should OSHP have priority over my county's EMS & Fire agencies...it runs contrary to everything in emergency response in Ohio for decades, where the fire chief lawfully had control of a scene.

I don't think Harris is the perfect system, but I have been impressed with the efforts of Cleveland Communications to provide interoperability with MARCS in Medina County. I think it was two-fold. MARCS had to work with Cleveland Communications, or risk the whole county going to the Cleveland Communications system, and Cleveland Communications had to work with MARCS to placate to fire agencies that pre-existed on MARCS.

 

[N8WCP]

"There's pluses and minuses to each system."

Yes, but everyone using one system vs disparate systems aids interoperability.

"Motorola who has a history of ending their support for products fairly early, and forcing customers to newer, err...pricier, technologies"

Forced or lack of knowledge on the part of the user? Micros and chipsets have a short life cycle compared to passive devices and manufactures can be caught off guard when a vendor ceases production. End of support for a radio doesn't equate to end of useful life. The XTL series of mobiles are built like a tank. They will outlive us all unless another feature is mandated. Even the XTS portables will continue to function for many years to come.

"MARCS impresses in their sales spiels and PowerPoints about their 24/7 network monitoring and management, but they continue to be non-responsive to coverage and security issues."

MARCS coverage messaging has been consistent, they provide on-street mobile coverage. If a community or county desires more, they can partner with MARCS to add sites. Portage is doing this now.

"MARCS lack of day-one Link Layer Authorization led to a major security breach and criminal charges. Amazing that no one lost their job over that."

I don't believe LLA was available when MARCS launched P25 and then there's the issue of subscriber unit capabilities to deal with. There's more to the Stark issue than what made the news. I would have preferred the state legislature pass a law to make illegal access to a public safety network a felony with a mandatory prison sentence vs collectively spending millions of dollars on radio authentication.

"I also wouldn't want to be stuck on a system like MARCS where state agencies are prioritized over my agency in a catastrophic event"

The only priority that can be set is during a system busy. I agree that all law, fire, and EMS should have the same priority as one is not more important than the other. Your should take that up with the SIEC regional feeder groups or the MARCS Local Government Subcommittee which meets on the 28th.

"Why should OSHP have priority over my county's EMS & Fire agencies...it runs contrary to everything in emergency response in Ohio for decades, where the fire chief lawfully had control of a scene."

OSHP thinks vary highly of themselves, if they had their way they would be the only law enforcement in the state.

"I don't think Harris is the perfect system, but I have been impressed with the efforts of Cleveland Communications to provide interoperability with MARCS in Medina County. I think it was two-fold. MARCS had to work with Cleveland Communications, or risk the whole county going to the Cleveland Communications system, and Cleveland Communications had to work with MARCS to placate to fire agencies that pre-existed on MARCS."

Medina is a cluster, some on MARCS and some on Harris. The former sheriff made a terrible decision to move forward with Harris.

 

[LarryHarrisThe3rd]

Yes, but everyone using one system vs disparate systems aids interoperability.



Forced or lack of knowledge on the part of the user? Micros and chipsets have a short life cycle compared to passive devices and manufactures can be caught off guard when a vendor ceases production. End of support for a radio doesn't equate to end of useful life. The XTL series of mobiles are built like a tank. They will outlive us all unless another feature is mandated. Even the XTS portables will continue to function for many years to come.



MARCS coverage messaging has been consistent, they provide on-street mobile coverage. If a community or county desires more, they can partner with MARCS to add sites. Portage is doing this now.



I don't believe LLA was available when MARCS launched P25 and then there's the issue of subscriber unit capabilities to deal with. There's more to the Stark issue than what made the news. I would have preferred the state legislature pass a law to make illegal access to a public safety network a felony with a mandatory prison sentence vs collectively spending millions of dollars on radio authentication.



The only priority that can be set is during a system busy. I agree that all law, fire, and EMS should have the same priority as one is not more important than the other. Your should take that up with the SIEC regional feeder groups or the MARCS Local Government Subcommittee which meets on the 28th.



OSHP thinks vary highly of themselves, if they had their way they would be the only law enforcement in the state.



Medina is a cluster, some on MARCS and some on Harris. The former sheriff made a terrible decision to move forward with Harris.

MARCS caused the "cluster" in Medina County. Their predatory political maneuvering took fire departments from the Medina system by using the state Fire Marshal's grant program to force grant awardees to use MARCS. It's nice that the F/M offers those grants to poor fire departments but forcing them to use a particular radio system is wrong. No the former Sheriff didn't make a "terrible" decision. "M" was somewhere around 5X the cost offered by CCI through a legitimate bid process. Going with "M" would have been a terrible decision. As it is, the F/D's being on MARCS caused the county to spend thousands of dollars to accommodate that for dispatching purposes. Brunswick, Wadsworth and the county do have the interoperability working well.

 

[wd8chl]

Elyria FD wants on the 5-City system.

The misinformation in that news article is astounding. Lorain responded to that call too. They could not talk to Sheffield because Sheffield moved to that new system. Sheffield is where the fault lies. They decided they don't want anyone else to talk to them, I guess.
Prior to this, all of Lorain county FD could talk to any other dept by merely changing channels on their radios. They all had every other dept. The only exception was that N. Ridgeville was on UHF by themselves. But even there, the trucks all had VHF radios as well, so no real problem. Now, interoperability is out the window. N. Ridgeville PD can't talk to N. Ridgeville fire anymore in fact, since the PD went to MARCS, and FD went to the "5-city" system.
Then there's all the misinformation/lack of understanding about how 7/800 MHz works vs. VHF/UHF. Propagation on 800 is terrible for a rural/suburban area like Lorain Co. 800 is only ok for big cities, and the only reason anyone went there was channel capacity. Coverage will need far more sites than VHF will, and each site will be 5-10 times the cost. 1/2 million to a million is not unusual for a 7/800 trunked site. A Vhf site should seldom run more than $100,000 even if a new tower must be built.
Another problem is building penetration. They think 7/800 will penetrate into buildings better. It doesn't. They thought they wouldn't need BDA's in buildings. The very first new building that went in (Bendix) before anyone had even moved over to this system failed, and they had to put in a BDA, costing somewhere between $30-100,000. Their old VHF system worked fine inside.
They also think that analog is "going away", and they will have to go digital by law, and that VHF/UHF is going away as well, by law. There is no truth to any of it. There is nothing anywhere that says anyone has to change anything, except for the narrowband requirements from 7-8 years ago, which should all be done by now (lol).
All of this is strictly political, and has nothing to do with improving communications.

 

[wd8chl]

Another problem is this new system just flat sounds like crap. Muddy audio, muffled, etc. It's very hard to understand what is being said. Then there's that automatic dispatch. Worst sounding speech synth since the speak-and-spell.

 

[LarryHarrisThe3rd]

The misinformation in that news article is astounding. Lorain responded to that call too. They could not talk to Sheffield because Sheffield moved to that new system. Sheffield is where the fault lies. They decided they don't want anyone else to talk to them, I guess.
Prior to this, all of Lorain county FD could talk to any other dept by merely changing channels on their radios. They all had every other dept. The only exception was that N. Ridgeville was on UHF by themselves. But even there, the trucks all had VHF radios as well, so no real problem. Now, interoperability is out the window. N. Ridgeville PD can't talk to N. Ridgeville fire anymore in fact, since the PD went to MARCS, and FD went to the "5-city" system.
Then there's all the misinformation/lack of understanding about how 7/800 MHz works vs. VHF/UHF. Propagation on 800 is terrible for a rural/suburban area like Lorain Co. 800 is only ok for big cities, and the only reason anyone went there was channel capacity. Coverage will need far more sites than VHF will, and each site will be 5-10 times the cost. 1/2 million to a million is not unusual for a 7/800 trunked site. A Vhf site should seldom run more than $100,000 even if a new tower must be built.
Another problem is building penetration. They think 7/800 will penetrate into buildings better. It doesn't. They thought they wouldn't need BDA's in buildings. The very first new building that went in (Bendix) before anyone had even moved over to this system failed, and they had to put in a BDA, costing somewhere between $30-100,000. Their old VHF system worked fine inside.
They also think that analog is "going away", and they will have to go digital by law, and that VHF/UHF is going away as well, by law. There is no truth to any of it. There is nothing anywhere that says anyone has to change anything, except for the narrowband requirements from 7-8 years ago, which should all be done by now (lol).
All of this is strictly political, and has nothing to do with improving communications.

I joined this forum to do what I can to defend the good people at CCI. I will be professional and non-personal. I have watched for years as CCI is kicked around for not conforming to the Pravda line, and uninformed people make statements about them without knowledge of what actually transpired. The statement I'm responding to here contains factual errors, I won't respond to all of them but I will set the record straight on the Bendix BDA. I spoke with people who know, and found out the Bendix BDA predated the CCI system being used. The CCI system was in the coverage testing stages and the Bendix BDA was installed to enhance MARCS coverage, not the CCI system.

There is a BDA being installed at North Ridgeville high school that will only be there to support MARCS. I've heard how bad MARCS works in that building. What needs to be noted is how poorly those BDA's will work for their intended system. A wideband BDA will set it's AGC to enhance the strongest signal it hears. The problem here for MARCS is, the CCI system signal in both locations will arrive at the receiver stronger than the MARCS system. That means the MARCS system will not receive the intended benefit of signal enhancement. Before anyone blames CCI for this, it's not their fault. Their system is perfectly legal and providing adequate signal for their users.

Here's something to consider, if the BDA in either location causes harm to the CCI system users, the BDA owner will have to spend more money to redsign the antenna system to stop harming the CCI system or simply shut it off, (I don't think anyone wants that).

 

[LarryHarrisThe3rd]

Another problem is this new system just flat sounds like crap. Muddy audio, muffled, etc. It's very hard to understand what is being said. Then there's that automatic dispatch. Worst sounding speech synth since the speak-and-spell.

I've stood next to users of the system and the audio coming from their radios is crystal clear. I can agree the recorded voice of the automated dispatch is robotic but that's the nature of trans-coding voice and sending it through a radio system. It sounds pretty good given what it goes through.

 

[N8WCP]

MARCS caused the "cluster" in Medina County. Their predatory political maneuvering took fire departments from the Medina system by using the state Fire Marshal's grant program to force grant awardees to use MARCS. It's nice that the F/M offers those grants to poor fire departments but forcing them to use a particular radio system is wrong. No the former Sheriff didn't make a "terrible" decision. "M" was somewhere around 5X the cost offered by CCI through a legitimate bid process. Going with "M" would have been a terrible decision. As it is, the F/D's being on MARCS caused the county to spend thousands of dollars to accommodate that for dispatching purposes. Brunswick, Wadsworth and the county do have the interoperability working well.

I disagree. MARCS was present in Medina long before the Harris system. The former EMA director Buck Adams favored working with MARCS as they moved towards P25. The Fire Marshall grants are inline with federal funding to encourage users to utilize shared systems which as been the goal since 9/11.

 

[N8WCP]

I joined this forum to do what I can to defend the good people at CCI. I will be professional and non-personal. I have watched for years as CCI is kicked around for not conforming to the Pravda line, and uninformed people make statements about them without knowledge of what actually transpired. The statement I'm responding to here contains factual errors, I won't respond to all of them but I will set the record straight on the Bendix BDA. I spoke with people who know, and found out the Bendix BDA predated the CCI system being used. The CCI system was in the coverage testing stages and the Bendix BDA was installed to enhance MARCS coverage, not the CCI system.

There is a BDA being installed at North Ridgeville high school that will only be there to support MARCS. I've heard how bad MARCS works in that building. What needs to be noted is how poorly those BDA's will work for their intended system. A wideband BDA will set it's AGC to enhance the strongest signal it hears. The problem here for MARCS is, the CCI system signal in both locations will arrive at the receiver stronger than the MARCS system. That means the MARCS system will not receive the intended benefit of signal enhancement. Before anyone blames CCI for this, it's not their fault. Their system is perfectly legal and providing adequate signal for their users.

Here's something to consider, if the BDA in either location causes harm to the CCI system users, the BDA owner will have to spend more money to redsign the antenna system to stop harming the CCI system or simply shut it off, (I don't think anyone wants that).

I want to be clear that my comments are not directed at CCI but the decisions some public officials are making. Your assessment of the proposed N. Ridgeville BDA is accurate. Typically Motorola prefers channelized BDA's so I wonder who is installing a wideband system.

 

[tweiss3]

My concern is who is responsible for changes to the BDA system? The fire department? The owner? The schools just spent tons of money installing BDA systems in the new schools, now they might get hit with another right hook from the FD?

 

[kf8yk]

My concern is who is responsible for changes to the BDA system? The fire department? The owner? The schools just spent tons of money installing BDA systems in the new schools, now they might get hit with another right hook from the FD?

BDA's are governed by the Ohio Fire Code section 510. Modifications on systems required by the fire code are the responsibility of the building owner.

 

[amcferrin90]

I joined this forum to do what I can to defend the good people at CCI. I will be professional and non-personal. I have watched for years as CCI is kicked around for not conforming to the Pravda line, and uninformed people make statements about them without knowledge of what actually transpired. The statement I'm responding to here contains factual errors, I won't respond to all of them but I will set the record straight on the Bendix BDA. I spoke with people who know, and found out the Bendix BDA predated the CCI system being used. The CCI system was in the coverage testing stages and the Bendix BDA was installed to enhance MARCS coverage, not the CCI system.

There is a BDA being installed at North Ridgeville high school that will only be there to support MARCS. I've heard how bad MARCS works in that building. What needs to be noted is how poorly those BDA's will work for their intended system. A wideband BDA will set it's AGC to enhance the strongest signal it hears. The problem here for MARCS is, the CCI system signal in both locations will arrive at the receiver stronger than the MARCS system. That means the MARCS system will not receive the intended benefit of signal enhancement. Before anyone blames CCI for this, it's not their fault. Their system is perfectly legal and providing adequate signal for their users.

Here's something to consider, if the BDA in either location causes harm to the CCI system users, the BDA owner will have to spend more money to redsign the antenna system to stop harming the CCI system or simply shut it off, (I don't think anyone wants that).

MARCS requires channelized BDAs. They won't allow broadband units for this very reason. But the problem is many of the folks that install these BDAs don't follow the FCC guidelines and get permission from MARCS (or the respective radio system operator). Bring this down to central Ohio where every radio network here requires a channelized BDA: most BDAs being installed are broadband and the installers are not getting permission from the radio networks. If these are done correctly, they work great. I've done schools that have zero MARCS coverage indoors before and terrific coverage after.

 

[wd8chl]

I disagree. MARCS was present in Medina long before the Harris system. The former EMA director Buck Adams favored working with MARCS as they moved towards P25. The Fire Marshall grants are inline with federal funding to encourage users to utilize shared systems which as been the goal since 9/11.

Agreed. And it is working much better than the county-wide system. Most everyone in the county has moved to MARCS. There are still coverage issues, but it's better than the other.