Has Motorola dropped the P25 CAP ball ?

[mikey60]

FWIW - in Colorado, the CC frequencies on the statewide DTRS are re-used. I believe Mike's count takes that into account though.

It does. Did the Import with PSREdit500 to do the counts. Those are the Unique frequency counts.

Mike

 

[INDY72]

MSWIN, just getting started good and WELL over the 25 Primary CC count lol.

 

[OpSec]

Based on the current RR Database information:

The State of Michigan system currently has 49 Unique primary control channel frequencies across the system. Adding in the Alternates that number jumps to 92.

The ARMOR system in Minnesota has 76 Unique primary control channels, and 116 when the alternates are added in.

The Colorado DTRS system has 116 Unique primary control channels, and 243 when you add the alternates.

Mike

The WISCOM system in WI will have 80 sites when all said and done with Phase 1 and very few of the sites are going to be sharing freqs because it's a VHF system, so I would imagine there will be north of 50 unique CC freqs if not 80. The details have not been worked out as of yet.

 

[jets1961]

to types od systems are being talked about.

I think in this thread we are talking about two different types of systems in regards to the max number of CC's.

In Motorola mixed mode systems (digital/analog, 3600 baud CC), in these systems there can be upto 32 unique CC (not 25). Correct me if I am wrong, but if you go to program in more in a scanner or radio you can't. I know this is true for Motorola 800Mhz systems. Don't know for sure about UHF and VHF mixed mode systems?

But with the true APCO 25 systems I think it is full spectrum and thus more than 32 CC's.

Just my thoughts, comments?

 

[ElroyJetson]

The P25 standard isn't really as sharply defined as it needs to be. Every vendor should be required to refer to the same data by the same standardized name, to avoid any possible confusion, and control channel standards should be set.

Furthermore, Motorola needs to be able to get radios in operation on another vendor's system, one that does not require a system key file, without having to fabricate a dummy key. Nobody else is using system keys, other than EFJ, and they're a Moto licensee.

I'd really like to see .gov set one simple rule: You can't call it a P25 compliant system if it's not a FULLY compliant system. No proprietary features allowed in a "compliant" system. And only compliant solutions should be eligible for grant money.

If vendors wish to offer features that are not in the standard specs, then in order for it to be allowed in a P25 compliant system, then they must make that proprietary feature NON-proprietary, by publishing the specifics of it for the use of all the P25 product vendors, should they choose to do so. This provides a path for system upgrades based on customer-desired features while preserving the requirement for compatibility.


Elroy

 

[bradpradio7420]

great idea to set industry wide standards for p25 but how would you actually get all the companies like motorola and harris to make their proprietary features non proprietary they would all say that that is a trade secret and would probably not wont their competitors to have information that the companies spent alot of money and time developing. but i do fully agree that all vendors should have certain industry wide standards to have to follow if they want to make a p25 system. if motorola is the only vendor that is having issues with this then they need to get on the ball and develop a system that can be fully integrated into another vendors system

 

[greenthumb]

great idea to set industry wide standards for p25 but how would you actually get all the companies like motorola and harris to make their proprietary features non proprietary they would all say that that is a trade secret and would probably not wont their competitors to have information that the companies spent alot of money and time developing. but i do fully agree that all vendors should have certain industry wide standards to have to follow if they want to make a p25 system. if motorola is the only vendor that is having issues with this then they need to get on the ball and develop a system that can be fully integrated into another vendors system

Which 'proprietary features' are you speaking about? Some proprietary features that are used are that way because the standards don't define how that feature should work. Other features do not fall into that category, but the standards allow for manufacturer-specific features. The standards allow the basics to be interoperable (placing a talk group, multigroup, private call, send an emergency, etc.) but proprietary features are, and should be allowed. If the standards don't define something (e.g. GPS location), it's nonsense not to allow a vendor to implement it just because it's P25. It will take years for the standards process to get a finalized version of it. I sense that you don't understand that the standards process for P25 are extremely slow (relative to other standards processes, such as cellular) and the interfaces defined in P25 are not all-inclusive. The standards are not anywhere close to mature enough to 'fully integrate' one vendor's system into another vendor's.

For the moment, the only interface that is defined is the CAI (over-the-air). ISSI is very, very close but that only defines an interface between two RFSS. So, in essence, the only features P25 has today are:

-Radios from varying manufacturers can talk to infrastructure from varying manufacturers over the air (for basic features).
-Two or more systems from varying manufacturers can pass talk group audio (clear & encrypted) between them.

Unfortunately, that's all - and it's not much.

 

[joescanner]

Nobody else is using system keys, other than EFJ

And Tait.

 

[gesucks]

And Tait.

there is plenty more than those 3