Interoperability; from the Colorado Forum

[jeatock]

http://forums.radioreference.com/co...d-save-boulder-co-brush-fire.html#post1410167

Quote:
Originally Posted by resq197 View Post
Communications really were very good on this fire. There were plenty of tac channels available and with the mountain and flatlands channel plans, everyone had each others discrete channels in addition to the County and mutual aid channels. Red6 was excellent for the command repeater with its county-wide transmitter coverage and multiple receivers. There was no technical reason that fire couldn't have stayed on the County system even after the Feds arrived. With the NIFC/NIRSC radios and many other agencies bringing their VHF gear, it's hard to imagine a more interoperable system.

-Brian
End Quote.

If this is true (and it simply can't be, or so say the gods of highly engineered statewide systems) it would mean that $400 simplex VHF radios work better for incident interoperability than multi-million dollar tax-supported infrastructure system requiring the use of proprietary sole-source-vendor $5,000 radios.

BLASPHEMY!

(Evil grin)

 

[TrenchFeeder]

The Will County EDACS works just fine.

I think all these "experts" who say you now need digital radios, that cost way more than they should considering how poorly they work, are just plants from radio companies.

 

[jeatock]

More blasphemy! Mother and the State of Illinois cannot be wrong!

(Another evil grin)

 

[RoninJoliet]

My digital scanners work great especially on Starcom using the 396XT,996XT and RS197 digitl base....Starcom is fantastic listening all the way to Pontiac on some towers with just a RS800 rubber duck....Purchasing a scanner now a days its very important to get one thats "REBANDABLE"....

 

[usswood]

http://forums.radioreference.com/co...d-save-boulder-co-brush-fire.html#post1410167

Quote:
Originally Posted by resq197 View Post
Communications really were very good on this fire. There were plenty of tac channels available and with the mountain and flatlands channel plans, everyone had each others discrete channels in addition to the County and mutual aid channels. Red6 was excellent for the command repeater with its county-wide transmitter coverage and multiple receivers. There was no technical reason that fire couldn't have stayed on the County system even after the Feds arrived. With the NIFC/NIRSC radios and many other agencies bringing their VHF gear, it's hard to imagine a more interoperable system.

-Brian
End Quote.

If this is true (and it simply can't be, or so say the gods of highly engineered statewide systems) it would mean that $400 simplex VHF radios work better for incident interoperability than multi-million dollar tax-supported infrastructure system requiring the use of proprietary sole-source-vendor $5,000 radios.

BLASPHEMY!

(Evil grin)

i agree...nothing wrong with VHF expect the fact that most departments just stop buying the equipment and that was the problem....quick fixes to old equipment instead of just buying new VHF stuff!

 

[jeatock]

Serious reply to the two preceding posts.

This forum seems to be comprised to two separate (and legitimate) user groups:

1. Scanner users. This is by far the most important, and the stated reason for this forum. Towards that end, any type of repeated system, be it statewide digital 800 trunking or a simple local analog repeater system, provides far better listening for the casual user. Being able to hear mobile users on a 'rubber duckie' antenna at a distance from an incident is great. (Meant seriously.) I personally belong to that group, both as a professional and as a casual user.

2. Public Safety Professional Users. A secondary user group in this forum, but one with a great many followers. I belong professionally to that group, and it is towards it that my comments above are primarily directed.

In Illinois, Starcom users are interoperable with all other Starcom users statewide. On the surface, that looks like a wonderful thing. However, the reality for us folks out here on the pointy end of the spear is a vastly different thing.

I have two issues with Starcom, namely performance and cost.

One technology does not fit all applications. 800MHz does a fine job in and around buildings, and on flat land, but has issues in rough terrain with thick vegetation. 154MHz VHF sucks in buildings (except in conventional frame houses and light commercial structures), but does pretty well in rough terrain where there is lots of vegetation and trees.

Guess what we have? To force us to use a technology that is proven industry-wide to NOT work well in our environment is ludicrous. And for life & safety communications to rely on a complex infrastructure system that is proven to have issues in our type of area is potentially disastrous.

Most non-urban fire and EMS agencies have very limited funds. The average fire department budget in my county is somewhere south of $25K per year. Insurance, diesel, unplanned maintenance, and equipment payments take up most of the budget. Anything left over helps keep the heat on during the winter so the pipes don't freeze.

Starcom radios cost between $4,000.00 and $7,500.00 each. Starting next year, there will be a $76.00 per radio per month user fee. Starcom radios are basically ONLY interoperable with other Starcom radios. I have no objection to being interoperable with Springfield and Metro East St. Louis, but they're 90 minutes away and to my knowledge we have never played together. Mutual aid agencies from Missouri don't have Starcom capability.

VHF radios cost less than $500 each, with no user fees. Successful regional grants and an understanding county have blessed us with good VHF infrastructure, even with our tight budgets.We are 99% interoperable with EVERY surrounding Fire/EMS/Law agency from two states on VHF, but are 1% interoperable with the ISP and IEMA (mostly via cell phone ). Analog VHF IS the nationwide interoperable standard.

Do the math: 15 radios per agency (5 mobiles and 10 portables) times twelve months times $76.00 exceeds half of the average local budget.We loose interoperability unless we continue to maintain two separate radios systems, which rather defeats the purpose of the exercise.

Why switch to Starcom? The only reason I can see is to placate the state bureaucracy, and line a few pockets so 50 local folks working a big y'all come incident (once every 5 years) can be interoperable with a handful of State and Federal agencies here to help. I can make that happen by handing out a few $500 radios or with a simple bridge that's only active when need be.

 

[RoninJoliet]

Im just a 45 year scanner listener and i would rather listen to the VHF-UHF systems i started listening to years ago, this new hi-tech stuf is for the birds and the "tech's" they use nowadays are not as good (my opinion) as years back....But with new 700-800 equipment brought out i just am able to hear a little better and further than in the old days....Im hear you with the foliage problem, im just now hearing Starcom better since the leaves are dropping...I hate this new 7.5 split stuff as the audio is worse and good thing for PL-DCS -NAC because everyone is sandwiched together!!!!....