Enhancing Coverage

[dgruver911]

We have a 3 site 8 channel simulcast P25 800 system as part of the statewide Kansas system. It has a simulcast VHF paging system piggy-backed on with a 4th site as well.
Our issue: The area around the 4th paging site is a large county-owned park and lake. Frequent parks, law, ems and fire calls. Portable coverage is horrible. I can't really justify a 4th simulcast site but I may have to just to fill in the hole. Unless experts out there have a better idea. I've considered DVRS, but would have to have several to accommodate the number of talkgroups, then there's coming up with the conventional repeater pairs and putting them in everyone's radios. What other alternatives could I consider? And forget a 3-pack mini site, the state says no. Open to any and all suggestions at this point. Thanks.

 

[jeepsandradios]

If you have the tower the logical way is another simucast site. Thats the only way it will go smooth for end users, unless as you said you add stuff to everyones radios, retrain them on SOP to go to that xyz channel.

 

[nd5y]

Portable coverage is horrible.... Open to any and all suggestions at this point. Thanks.

Easy way to instantly improve portable coverage.
1. Get a large trash bag.
2. Remove all speaker-mics from the hand held radios.
3. Put all the speake-mics in the trash bag.
4. Train the users to hold the radio up in in the air in front of their faces. They are called hand held radios for a reason. Now you will have better coverage but the users also need to realize that there is no such thing as 100% radio coverage and the laws of physics are't different for public safety officials.
5. (optional) sell the speaker-mics to whackers on e-Bay.

 

[a417]

+1 on @kb2ztx

Can you get the state's risk management people involved in this?Show them a cost/benefits analysis of an additional simulcast site on the already present tower vs potential/actual liability of something happening in that area and poor communications being identified as an aggravating factor.

A band-aid fix might be cheaper now, but doing it once and doing it right means you can worry about other things, and not this. Fewer moving pieces, transparency for the end user...

 

[prcguy]

Yes on post #3. Otherwise what type, brand and model antennas are used at each site? Any antenna downtilt? What is the site elevation above average terrain? What is the distance from the site to the radios having problems?

If the antennas are really low gain then changing them out for higher gain making sure the pattern serves the needed areas can make a noticeable difference. Kansas is pretty flat, so I doubt you would have dead spots at the base of big hills or mountains going to higher gain antennas.

 

[dgruver911]

Easy way to instantly improve portable coverage.
1. Get a large trash bag.
2. Remove all speaker-mics from the hand held radios.
3. Put all the speake-mics in the trash bag.
4. Train the users to hold the radio up in in the air in front of their faces. They are called hand held radios for a reason. Now you will have better coverage but the users also need to realize that there is no such thing as 100% radio coverage and the laws of physics are't different for public safety officials.
5. (optional) sell the speaker-mics to whackers on e-Bay.

I fully expected at least one response like this...let me set you straight. The Parks guys don't use speaker mics. They all use their radios just as they are supposed to. However, when I go out there to verify their complaint and have 8 radios sitting on a table in front of me with full length antennas, no speaker mics and an RSSI of 0-20, well the problem is not how they use the radios. Thanks for not helping. Sorry that's just the kind of mood I'm in today.

 

[ecps92]

Yet you ran to a HOBBY web site to ask for help [ shaking my head and kicking myself for even replying ]
Yes many folks here are also professionals, with greats answers, but really ?

I fully expected at least one response like this...let me set you straight. The Parks guys don't use speaker mics. They all use their radios just as they are supposed to. However, when I go out there to verify their complaint and have 8 radios sitting on a table in front of me with full length antennas, no speaker mics and an RSSI of 0-20, well the problem is not how they use the radios. Thanks for not helping. Sorry that's just the kind of mood I'm in today.

 

[12dbsinad]

Just put up a conventional site at the 4th site. Obviously you needed the 4th site for paging (at VHF even), so whoever the brainchild was who designed the system clearly had a brain fart.

 

[NVAGVUP]

Look at adding a multicast site as the 4th site. (vs simulcast) Depending upon vertical real estate and coverage needed. This assumes you can get connectivity into the site. (If you do not already have it). Multicast is cheaper to construct/deploy vs simul (No GPS needed, channel qty does not need to match simul sites, no added comparator, etc). No you will not have the benefit of simulcast signal or comparators. Make sure your antenna systems are properly designed/optimized (Proper isolation and TTA/gain). Along with some system admin work, a multicast site can be integrated into the system just fine.

The infrastructure I oversee is a mix of a 4 site simulcast sub system and 5 multicast sites. Where a simulcast system really excels is with in building coverage. It sounds like you situation is more rural/on the street coverage need.