LA-RICS RFP Released

Status
Not open for further replies.

jlanfn

California Database Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 31, 2006
Messages
366
Location
San Bernardino County
As posted on la-rics.org:
LA-RICS RFP released Apr. 5, 2010

The LA-RICS communications system RFP has been released and is posted here on the Los Angeles County website. Search by "bid title" for "LA-RICS".
There are some pretty surprising technical requirements in the specification. It's a long read but highly informative.
 

LAflyer

Global DB Admin
Moderator
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
1,631
Location
SoCal
I see the term encryption littered across the document.
 
N

N_Jay

Guest
Actually, it doesn't. I see a lot of vendor- and integrator- neutral stuff in it.
Very true.

It is all about perspective.

Unless you have read a lot of these (or written a few) it is easy to misinterpret.
 

2wayfreq

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
397
Location
Tucson, AZ
Yeah,
I guess with encryption, those LA news stringers will be will be kinda unemployed, ooops ;).
 

scanfan22

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2009
Messages
250
Location
North Hollywood CA
To anyone who wishes to reply:

Who is paying for this monstrosity of a system? Especially in these tough financial times.
Why do they need a digital trunked system and an analog conventional "subsystem"?
What are the differences between the two? Why is the encryption needed and how much would it be utilized?
 
N

N_Jay

Guest
To anyone who wishes to reply:
Are you sure you want "anyone"?

Who is paying for this monstrosity of a system?
You seem to have defined it negatively.
Based on?

As with any government procurement, taxes, fees and grants.

Especially in these tough financial times.
The planning of these systems happens over quite a long time frame.
What public safety systems do you want planned and built only during good economic times?

Why do they need a digital trunked system and an analog conventional "subsystem"?
For lots of reasons.
Features, functions, capacity, coverage, interoperability, etc.

What are the differences between the two?
Their design and their use.

Why is the encryption needed
For communications that require security.

and how much would it be utilized?
The system; A lot.
The encryption; enough.
 

scanfan22

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2009
Messages
250
Location
North Hollywood CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by scanfan22 View Post
To anyone who wishes to reply:
Are you sure you want "anyone"?

No offense but not anyone, only those who will give intelligent answers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scanfan22 View Post
Who is paying for this monstrosity of a system?
You seem to have defined it negatively.
Based on?

It is an ambitious project no? And it is not free or cheap and we (tax payers) are probably footing the bill. Why should we pay? Is it really necessary? An upgrade to the CHP system was needed, this I'm not so sure...

As with any government procurement, taxes, fees and grants.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scanfan22 View Post
Especially in these tough financial times.
The planning of these systems happens over quite a long time frame.
What public safety systems do you want planned and built only during good economic times?

No, but I want governments to spend wisely and plan better so we're not footing the bill and we're not losing out on government services due to wasteful spending and poor planning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scanfan22 View Post
Why do they need a digital trunked system and an analog conventional "subsystem"?
For lots of reasons.
Features, functions, capacity, coverage, interoperability, etc.

Care to be more specific?

Quote:
Originally Posted by scanfan22 View Post
What are the differences between the two?
Their design and their use.

That was obvious. Specifics please.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scanfan22 View Post
Why is the encryption needed
For communications that require security.

That was obvious. Specifics please. Encryption is used very little in LA county otherwise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scanfan22 View Post
and how much would it be utilized?
The system; A lot.
The encryption; enough.

Once again please answer with a complete informative thought.

No offense but I expected more useful answers that I didn't already know. Just because P25 digital systems are the latest radio fade and Interoperability is the latest buzz word doesn't justify the need or cost for such a system....
 
N

N_Jay

Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by scanfan22 View Post
To anyone who wishes to reply:
Are you sure you want "anyone"?

No offense but not anyone, only those who will give intelligent answers. ...
Please CLEARLY show where my answers were not "intelligent".
Yes, they are short, but you are asking very open-ended questions on topics that require at-length discussions.

Sorry that my answers did not meet your expectations.

I am quite sure that if I had posted incorrect answers that fit your preconceived ideas, you would not have objected. ;)

Quote:
Originally Posted by scanfan22 View Post
Who is paying for this monstrosity of a system?
You seem to have defined it negatively.
Based on?

It is an ambitious project no? And it is not free or cheap and we (tax payers) are probably footing the bill. Why should we pay? Is it really necessary? An upgrade to the CHP system was needed, this I'm not so sure...
Yes, it is a large and ambitious project.
But you pre-supposed it was a "monstrosity" without basis.

The points you bring up were not in your original question.

Now you seem to imply that you are better positioned to decide which agencies and regions require system upgrades and new systems than the people responsible for planning those upgrades and replacements.

Do you have some basis for your belief in your superior knowledge?

Quote:
Originally Posted by scanfan22 View Post
Especially in these tough financial times.
The planning of these systems happens over quite a long time frame.
What public safety systems do you want planned and built only during good economic times?

No, but I want governments to spend wisely and plan better so we're not footing the bill and we're not losing out on government services due to wasteful spending and poor planning. ....
Yes, we all do. Have you been to any meetings on these decisions?
Do you have any insight that justifies your assumption that the decision is "poor", or are you guessing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by scanfan22 View Post
Why do they need a digital trunked system and an analog conventional "subsystem"?
For lots of reasons.
Features, functions, capacity, coverage, interoperability, etc.

Care to be more specific? ....
Maybe, although not specific to that program, because it is not mine.
Can you be more specific with your questions?

Quote:
Originally Posted by scanfan22 View Post
What are the differences between the two?
Their design and their use.

That was obvious. Specifics please.....
Can you be more specific with your question, or do you expect a full description of several years of needs assessments, planing and design work to be summarized for you, to answer your one line question?

Quote:
Originally Posted by scanfan22 View Post
Why is the encryption needed
For communications that require security.

That was obvious. Specifics please. Encryption is used very little in LA county otherwise....
Again, you want specifics to your general question.
Let me ask you.
1) Given that some encryption is used, and
2) Given that need for encryption has increased over time, and
3) Given that cost for encryption has come down, and
4) Given that the technical issues with encryption have been greatly reduced,
as well as other factors;
IF it were your decision to make;
How would you decide whether the communications system for the LA basin for the next 15 to 20 years should have the capability to carry encryption or not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by scanfan22 View Post
and how much would it be utilized?
The system; A lot.
The encryption; enough.

Once again please answer with a complete informative thought.....
Please answer the above before you make snap decisions as to who has taken the time to put "complete informative thought" into their QUESTIONS or ANSWERS!

No offense but I expected more useful answers that I didn't already know. Just because P25 digital systems are the latest radio fade and Interoperability is the latest buzz word doesn't justify the need or cost for such a system....
No offense, but I expected your response given the questions you asked and the words you used to ask them.
 

scanfan22

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2009
Messages
250
Location
North Hollywood CA
Whoa DR! You can hang a star on that Baby!

To take the high road on this and not cause embarrassment or harm either way let's move this debate to pm if you wish. Otherwise I'll sit back and let you guys speak your peace. I have strong opinions on this topic (LA-RICS) as I've stated but there really is no reason to publicly debate it. I will say that it is obvious that a new system will be needed in LA county for Public safety comms but I'm not sure LA-RICS is the answer. Time will tell and hopefully things work out. I don't claim to be the most knowledgeable about LA-RICS or public safety comms in general but I am a concerned citizen. Good Day sir!


Please CLEARLY show where my answers were not "intelligent".
Yes, they are short, but you are asking very open-ended questions on topics that require at-length discussions.

Sorry that my answers did not meet your expectations.

I am quite sure that if I had posted incorrect answers that fit your preconceived ideas, you would not have objected. ;)


Yes, it is a large and ambitious project.
But you pre-supposed it was a "monstrosity" without basis.

The points you bring up were not in your original question.

Now you seem to imply that you are better positioned to decide which agencies and regions require system upgrades and new systems than the people responsible for planning those upgrades and replacements.

Do you have some basis for your belief in your superior knowledge?


Yes, we all do. Have you been to any meetings on these decisions?
Do you have any insight that justifies your assumption that the decision is "poor", or are you guessing?


Maybe, although not specific to that program, because it is not mine.
Can you be more specific with your questions?


Can you be more specific with your question, or do you expect a full description of several years of needs assessments, planing and design work to be summarized for you, to answer your one line question?


Again, you want specifics to your general question.
Let me ask you.
1) Given that some encryption is used, and
2) Given that need for encryption has increased over time, and
3) Given that cost for encryption has come down, and
4) Given that the technical issues with encryption have been greatly reduced,
as well as other factors;
IF it were your decision to make;
How would you decide whether the communications system for the LA basin for the next 15 to 20 years should have the capability to carry encryption or not?


Please answer the above before you make snap decisions as to who has taken the time to put "complete informative thought" into their QUESTIONS or ANSWERS!


No offense, but I expected your response given the questions you asked and the words you used to ask them.
 

jlanfn

California Database Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 31, 2006
Messages
366
Location
San Bernardino County
Thanks for your restraint. It would be greatly appreciated if we could refrain from turning this thread into another for vs. anti trunking, digital, encryption, etc. argument like so many other threads on this forum.

If anyone wants to know why the LA-RICS Authority think they need/want the various parts of the system, just read the technical specification. It usually gives a brief statement of their reasoning under the "general" heading for each subsystem.

Regarding the subsystems, the entire LA-RICS is actually composed of at least four subsystems: P25 trunked, conventional analog, data (either narrowband or broadband), and what is called the Los Angeles Regional Tactical Communications Subsystem. Details of each are provided in the specification.

...Back to discussing the details. That they would specify the use of some encryption was completely expected. What I'm surprised about is that no one has commented on the specification to allow users' radios to hear both direct and repeated traffic simultaneously on digital channels...or that the Sheriff wants to continue to use the "busy tone" for some channels on this new system.
 

2wayfreq

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
397
Location
Tucson, AZ
I see that the spec requires a radio that is capable of 7/800 VHF and UHF (Incorrect?). The APX is only currently 2 models of V/7/8 or U/7/8 separately. But the Unity XG-100 is Quad band and so is the Thales Liberty. It might be a battle between Thales and Harris unless Motorola has something up their sleeve. There's rumor about Raytheon being in the running as well? Isn't this project supposed to cost somewhere close to a Billion Dollars?
 

Tobio63

Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
16
LA-RICS funding

To anyone who wishes to reply:
Who is paying for this monstrosity of a system? Especially in these tough financial times.
I don't know how LA-RICS JPA is playing on paying for the entire system. However, I do know that they have secured federal grant money of 37.1 million. Its not enough to cover a project of this magnitude, but its a start. Also if you read the RFP, there are stipulations for the "Proposer" to request and secure grants, outlined in pages 51, 73, 178

I've provided a LA County Doc. Go to page 5 to read more about the grant money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top