LA-RICS hopes P25 network from Motorola Solutions will be ready in October 2023

Status
Not open for further replies.

mmckenna

I ♥ Ø
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
25,050
Location
United States
I thought the nationwide intercommunications system was some stupid AT&T deal paid for by the TV band spectrum sell-off auction?

You are confusing regional P25 two way radio systems with FirstNet National Public Safety BROADBAND network. FirstNet is LTE. Two different systems, two different purposes.



Can each state decide what they want?

When NPSBN was first designed, each state and territory had the option of opting into FirstNet, or going it on their own. All states and territories chose to go the same path.

If you are talking about regional P25 networks, sure, states can do whatever the want.

And I second what others have said, a perfectly fine-tuned with time analog system with 99.1% coverage is abandoned for a digital system that will require 5 times as many towers and holes in coverage. Heck, even low band is a viable option in California for years, sometimes you don't need to re-invent the wheel?

Yep, I agree.

As long as they don't grow. Many areas were out of spectrum due to lots of little systems taking up available frequencies. As some systems needed to grow with their area of jurisdiction and population, they couldn't expand their existing systems. Many chose to migrate to 800MHz or 700MHz systems.

VHF, UHF and low band will always have their place, and they worked well. Analog still works great, and no matter what sales people tell you, it's still the default in interoperability.
 

2wayfreq

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
499
Location
NM Kirk City
There were delays with Riverside County (PSEC) system relating to Environmental Issues. I.E- Endangered animal habitats near sites, Site location negotiations with existing owners that fell through at the last minute and a new site had to be chosen for the footprint. R56 Grounding, NEPA Certifications on and on. These little pains were some of the more significant holdups.
 

12dbsinad

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2010
Messages
2,005
Yes! Especially when their sales people come in and sell digital as the fix for everything and try to replace a perfectly good working system. Then it doesn't have good coverage like the old system and the fix is more sites costing more $$ and more time. Then it doesn't do something else promised but more $$ and time will fix that too. If Blotorola never showed up at the front door the existing system might have run 20 more years and worked perfect for its intended purpose.
Tell me about it. Blotorola showed up at a local power company and converted them from lowband to 800. 12 sites should do it (mobile coverage), they are up to I think 45 at last count. Opps they said... forgot about the leaves on the trees, more money please! At that point what's one to do? They are already committed and can't back out.
 

INDY72

Monitoring since 1982, using radios since 1991.
Joined
Dec 18, 2002
Messages
14,841
Location
Indianapolis, IN
FirstNet is a whole other ball game and is not meant to replace LMR. RICS is for LACo and is LMR not LTE 5g crap
 

DeoVindice

P25 Underground
Joined
Sep 27, 2019
Messages
515
Location
Gadsden Purchase
I thought the nationwide intercommunications system was some stupid AT&T deal paid for by the TV band spectrum sell-off auction? Can each state decide what they want? And I second what others have said, a perfectly fine-tuned with time analog system with 99.1% coverage is abandoned for a digital system that will require 5 times as many towers and holes in coverage. Heck, even low band is a viable option in California for years, sometimes you don't need to re-invent the wheel?

To be fair to CHP, they're sticking with low band in some regions. Kenwood essentially developed the NX-5600 RF deck for CHP alone. Not everyone drank the Kool-Aid on 700/800 systems in mountainous areas.
 

wa8pyr

Technischer Guru
Staff member
Lead Database Admin
Joined
Sep 22, 2002
Messages
7,182
Location
Ohio
FirstNet is a whole other ball game and is not meant to replace LMR.

Actually not correct. The original purpose for FirstNet was to become the system for public safety nationwide, voice, data, you name it.

However, it took so long for FirstNet to get rolled out that many agencies went ahead and purchased new LMR systems; in addition to that some critical operational pieces needed to make LTE a viable mission-critical voice option still aren't perfected.

On top of that, you need to throw in a healthy dose of skepticism from local and state agencies regarding:

1. Loss of control of their radio system.
2. Potentially high monthly per-device costs simply to operate on FirstNet (and no say in setting those prices).
3. FirstNet is a monopoly.
4. Questionable coverage and capacity in many areas of the US.
5. Justifiable concern about putting all your eggs in one basket; if you put everything on one system, what do you do if it dies in your area?

Most of the discussion I hear about FirstNet these days revolves around it being an adjunct to your LMR system (broadband mobile data provider and possible backup voice system, in case your LMR system crashes). There is also some talk of connecting FirstNet to LMR systems for interoperability in the same manner as the Harris BeON solution, but around here at least, the tinkering continues with no real movement toward a roll-out.
 

mmckenna

I ♥ Ø
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
25,050
Location
United States
Actually not correct. The original purpose for FirstNet was to become the system for public safety nationwide, voice, data, you name it.

However, it took so long for FirstNet to get rolled out that many agencies went ahead and purchased new LMR systems; in addition to that some critical operational pieces needed to make LTE a viable mission-critical voice option still aren't perfected.

FirstNet was never intended to replace standard LMR radios. Even FirstNet will tell you that. The MCPTT they talk about still hasn't taken off, and inherent network and LTE delays will never let it work as well as standard LMR.

On top of that, you need to throw in a healthy dose of skepticism from local and state agencies regarding:

1. Loss of control of their radio system.

Yep, another good reason to stick with traditional LMR, and why most are.

2. Potentially high monthly per-device costs simply to operate on FirstNet (and no say in setting those prices).

Under state contracts, I haven't found that to be the case. Pricing is fixed and available to all agencies. If some agency decides to ignore available contract pricing, that's their own fault.

My Sonim XP8 cost a grand total of $0.99

I have unlimited everything, and it's running $44.99/month. Better than what I was getting before FirstNet.

3. FirstNet is a monopoly.

Yes, sort of. AT&T is operating it for the FirstNet Authority. The FirstNet Authority still maintains control over most of it, but AT&T does absolutely have their fingers in it. www.firstnet.gov

4. Questionable coverage and capacity in many areas of the US.

I haven't had an issue with capacity, in fact, it's been better than consumer AT&T.
Coverage, yeah, that's an issue. AT&T coverage is pretty sucky when you get out of the cities and away from major highways. Verizon is better. But, remember, Verizon had the opportunity to bid on the FirstNet contract and chose not to.

5. Justifiable concern about putting all your eggs in one basket; if you put everything on one system, what do you do if it dies in your area?

Most of the FirstNet devices will handle more than one SIM card. Most of our 'mission critical' stuff has a FirstNet SIM and a Verizon SIM. So far we've never been without service.

Most of the discussion I hear about FirstNet these days revolves around it being an adjunct to your LMR system (broadband mobile data provider and possible backup voice system, in case your LMR system crashes). There is also some talk of connecting FirstNet to LMR systems for interoperability in the same manner as the Harris BeON solution, but around here at least, the tinkering continues with no real movement toward a roll-out.

Most are looking at it for non-critical users to have access to LMR systems.

Yeah, some agencies have caught a case of the stupids and talked about throwing everything on FirstNet, but so far I've not heard of any agency actually giving up on two way radios.
Same thing happened back with NexTel, many agencies were going to use it as their radio system. It's not FirstNet that's to blame for this attitude, it's the bean counters and the people in positions of authority that do not understand the technology.
 

INDY72

Monitoring since 1982, using radios since 1991.
Joined
Dec 18, 2002
Messages
14,841
Location
Indianapolis, IN
Actually not correct. The original purpose for FirstNet was to become the system for public safety nationwide, voice, data, you name it.

However, it took so long for FirstNet to get rolled out that many agencies went ahead and purchased new LMR systems; in addition to that some critical operational pieces needed to make LTE a viable mission-critical voice option still aren't perfected.

On top of that, you need to throw in a healthy dose of skepticism from local and state agencies regarding:

1. Loss of control of their radio system.
2. Potentially high monthly per-device costs simply to operate on FirstNet (and no say in setting those prices).
3. FirstNet is a monopoly.
4. Questionable coverage and capacity in many areas of the US.
5. Justifiable concern about putting all your eggs in one basket; if you put everything on one system, what do you do if it dies in your area?

Most of the discussion I hear about FirstNet these days revolves around it being an adjunct to your LMR system (broadband mobile data provider and possible backup voice system, in case your LMR system crashes). There is also some talk of connecting FirstNet to LMR systems for interoperability in the same manner as the Harris BeON solution, but around here at least, the tinkering continues with no real movement toward a roll-out.
We connected FN to SAFE-T cores its fully part of our network now. So niw at event we need SOW and mobile/ portable FN stuff lol.
 

2wayfreq

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
499
Location
NM Kirk City
So, from what I understand they will use UHF T-Band as operational overlay channels for now? Then, move to pure 700/800 later?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top