Lancaster County PA votes for ARINC/Cassidian

Status
Not open for further replies.

Tommahawk

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
345
Location
MOUNT JOY, PA 17552
Vote due on radio provider for local police and firefighters - News

Finally integration that makes sense. All manufacturer radios with P25 capability can be used, not just one radio system. Its about darn time a government agency uses common sense.

The County of Lancaster has also insured the public that they will do everything they can to keep the system open for the public to listen to.

Way to go Lancaster County. Its been a very very very long process, and you were smart enough to back out of the Open SKY system.
 

zerg901

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
3,113
I dont see anything in this article about keeping the system open to the public. Was that stated elsewhere?
 

Tommahawk

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
345
Location
MOUNT JOY, PA 17552
Yes it was previously reported by Michael Weaver, director of communications that they are going to keep everything unencrypted, with the exception of particular TAC groups.....

"There are portable scanners that monitor T-band systems, according to Weaver, so private citizens who listen to emergency communications will not be left in the dark.""
 

902

Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2003
Messages
2,428
Location
Downsouthsomewhere
They may want to reconsider their choice in frequency bands and deploy in 800 in light of the H.R. 3630 Congressional kickback - I mean giveback of "T-Band" spectrum. Regardless of the ~10 year date and the proven track record of spectrum redeployment debacles that's more like building the pyramids, a lifespan of 10 years is not enough time to amortize a new system investment. I wouldn't make that investment, at least.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2011
Messages
36
Location
East of Nowhere
They may want to reconsider their choice in frequency bands and deploy in 800 in light of the H.R. 3630 Congressional kickback - I mean giveback of "T-Band" spectrum. Regardless of the ~10 year date and the proven track record of spectrum redeployment debacles that's more like building the pyramids, a lifespan of 10 years is not enough time to amortize a new system investment. I wouldn't make that investment, at least.
I mentioned this in the Lancaster County thread in the PA Discussion Boards section.

I'm guessing that ARINC knows all about this and will bring it to the table early in the contract negotiations period.

I don't think it requires a new RFP, but Lancaster may want to consider going 700/800 now assuming they have the spectrum to do so.
 

902

Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2003
Messages
2,428
Location
Downsouthsomewhere
I mentioned this in the Lancaster County thread in the PA Discussion Boards section.

I'm guessing that ARINC knows all about this and will bring it to the table early in the contract negotiations period.

I don't think it requires a new RFP, but Lancaster may want to consider going 700/800 now assuming they have the spectrum to do so.
I haven't lived in the area for 14 years (Chester Co, actually), but I thought they already built out part of their 800 MHz OpenSky network, so if the hardware and frequency allotments are still there, that might be a cost-saving factor if the consultant doesn't want to start from scratch or make a system performance-based bid (the bidders ultimately select sites to performance criteia). I'll go check out your PA thread. Thank you!

One side comment - ARINC... I'm surprised they're making the foray into public safety. I worked on a lot of their SMR stuff at a few airports before they went iDEN. Interesting.
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
0
Location
Virginia
Hills and mountains

,,, Lancaster may want to consider going 700/800 now assuming they have the spectrum to do so.,,
What's the terrian like there. One of biggest mistakes these radios vendors are making is going 800 mhz in the mountains. Hills and mountains are just not the place for voice communications that high. Maybe their vendor has a little common sense not to get into a headache down the road.
 

iamhere300

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 27, 2004
Messages
1,304
Location
Chappell Hill TX
One side comment - ARINC... I'm surprised they're making the foray into public safety. I worked on a lot of their SMR stuff at a few airports before they went iDEN. Interesting.

ARINC brings their knowledge of system integration, and uses primarily Tait equipment. Makes for a great combo.
 

iamhere300

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 27, 2004
Messages
1,304
Location
Chappell Hill TX
What's the terrian like there. One of biggest mistakes these radios vendors are making is going 800 mhz in the mountains. Hills and mountains are just not the place for voice communications that high. Maybe their vendor has a little common sense not to get into a headache down the road.
Simply not true.

800 Mhz works fine - with a properly engineered system. Even in the mountains, on the plains, in the valleys.
 

902

Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2003
Messages
2,428
Location
Downsouthsomewhere
ARINC brings their knowledge of system integration, and uses primarily Tait equipment. Makes for a great combo.
I met Sir Angus Tait at the APCO conference in Denver shortly before he died. Certainly a pioneer in the radio industry. I also have a freind who works for Tait; he was in Christchurch when they had their earthquakes.

Having lived the big sales and market manipulation machines some domestic manufacturers have set up, I have a favorable bias toward the lesser-known manufacturers - especially when they have products that have proven track records elsewhere.

ARINC is a different story. I saw their website after this was posted and see they're promoting themselves as a public safety contractor/consultant. I've never seen them out there in that capacity and haven't heard of any other projects in their public safety portfolio. I always considered them an aviation-centric service provider with their air band networks and airport services. Guess the need to build revenue is pushing them out of their core business.
 

iamhere300

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 27, 2004
Messages
1,304
Location
Chappell Hill TX
I met Sir Angus Tait at the APCO conference in Denver shortly before he died. Certainly a pioneer in the radio industry. I also have a freind who works for Tait; he was in Christchurch when they had their earthquakes.

.
Well, you have the best of friends...
 

MTS2000des

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2008
Messages
3,469
Location
Cobb County, GA Stadium Crime Zone
Simply not true.

800 Mhz works fine - with a properly engineered system. Even in the mountains, on the plains, in the valleys.
sure, if you have the number of sites needed for desired coverage, which using 700/800 in terrain challenged areas may be great for vendors, but a poor choice for customers.

Take the Alaska LMR system, most sites are VHF, with 700/800 in the few urban areas that exist in the state. Buildout to get the same coverage if all sites were 700/800 and you're talking about 3-4 times the infrastructure.

700/800 is not a cookie cutter one size fits all band for public safety in the USA, until someone finds the money ferry to pay for all of the needed infrastructure and long term maintenance of said stuff.
 

902

Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2003
Messages
2,428
Location
Downsouthsomewhere
sure, if you have the number of sites needed for desired coverage, which using 700/800 in terrain challenged areas may be great for vendors, but a poor choice for customers.

Take the Alaska LMR system, most sites are VHF, with 700/800 in the few urban areas that exist in the state. Buildout to get the same coverage if all sites were 700/800 and you're talking about 3-4 times the infrastructure.

700/800 is not a cookie cutter one size fits all band for public safety in the USA, until someone finds the money ferry to pay for all of the needed infrastructure and long term maintenance of said stuff.
That's Alaska. Where in southeastern PA might one be able to get the VHF resources to clear FB8/MO8 exclusivity to build a practical system? Don't forget that infrastructure size increases proportionately. VHF combiners can occupy an entire room. Antenna separation becomes an issue. There are no standardized splits and your input could very well be the output of an unaffiliated system. Intermod might prevent using otherwise viable frequencies. Overall, if you're not out in the northern plains or tundra, VHF trunking is mostly an abomination. If we were to have VHF trunking, it should have taken place on the Part 22 or VPC greenspace. Or channel 7 once most stations vacated to their digital homes.
 

Spleen

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
857
Location
Baltimore, MD
ARINC is a different story. I saw their website after this was posted and see they're promoting themselves as a public safety contractor/consultant. I've never seen them out there in that capacity and haven't heard of any other projects in their public safety portfolio. I always considered them an aviation-centric service provider with their air band networks and airport services. Guess the need to build revenue is pushing them out of their core business.

I've learned through hard experience...ARINC should probably return to the airport/aviation/avionics business before word gets out about their attempts to dabble in the public safety sector, especially the business of designing and "integrating" communications and command vehicles. We're still spending money trying to properly outfit our ARINC-outfitted truck...
 

MTS2000des

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2008
Messages
3,469
Location
Cobb County, GA Stadium Crime Zone
That's Alaska. Where in southeastern PA might one be able to get the VHF resources to clear FB8/MO8 exclusivity to build a practical system? Don't forget that infrastructure size increases proportionately. VHF combiners can occupy an entire room. Antenna separation becomes an issue. There are no standardized splits and your input could very well be the output of an unaffiliated system. Intermod might prevent using otherwise viable frequencies. Overall, if you're not out in the northern plains or tundra, VHF trunking is mostly an abomination. If we were to have VHF trunking, it should have taken place on the Part 22 or VPC greenspace. Or channel 7 once most stations vacated to their digital homes.
yes, and we have similar terrain challenges in North Georgia, pretty steep mountains.

then there is the problem of budgets. we have 159 counties, the majority of some in those mountain areas are DIRT POOR in a GOOD economy, nevermind that there may be ONE LEO backed up by GSP for an entire county and a population of less than 15K people...do they really NEED a complex 700/800 system of multiple sites? who's going to use it? how much will it cost to maintain such a system?

these are the factors often overlooked when procuring any large radio system, regardless of vendor.

I never said VHF was the end all solution, but in rural areas (north Georgia has similar terrain and population densities are some parts of PA), it fares much better than 700/800, with much less infrastructure. No one NEEDS 31 talk paths in those rural areas, 3-5 channels can even be OVERKILL. A single site Intellirepeater may be all some needs.

It all depends on who is doing the selling.

700/800 is practical for densely populated areas and urban centers. It's poorly suited for use in mountainous areas. Yes it can work- but how much is it going to cost to get it working and keep it going? No reason why one can't have a mixed spectrum system.

Cellular companies have been doing it for over a decade.
 

12dbsinad

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2010
Messages
1,199
yes, and we have similar terrain challenges in North Georgia, pretty steep mountains.

then there is the problem of budgets. we have 159 counties, the majority of some in those mountain areas are DIRT POOR in a GOOD economy, nevermind that there may be ONE LEO backed up by GSP for an entire county and a population of less than 15K people...do they really NEED a complex 700/800 system of multiple sites? who's going to use it? how much will it cost to maintain such a system?

these are the factors often overlooked when procuring any large radio system, regardless of vendor.

I never said VHF was the end all solution, but in rural areas (north Georgia has similar terrain and population densities are some parts of PA), it fares much better than 700/800, with much less infrastructure. No one NEEDS 31 talk paths in those rural areas, 3-5 channels can even be OVERKILL. A single site Intellirepeater may be all some needs.

It all depends on who is doing the selling.

700/800 is practical for densely populated areas and urban centers. It's poorly suited for use in mountainous areas. Yes it can work- but how much is it going to cost to get it working and keep it going? No reason why one can't have a mixed spectrum system.

Cellular companies have been doing it for over a decade.

MTS2000des hits the nail on the head with this one... and I completely agree with what he says. Sure, VHF frequencies are not always available, they are not paired which makes it a real pain, and it was the cats meow when everybody upgraded from low band back in the day... and it still is. Its one of the best bands for hilly terrain that there is, and the laws of RF isnt going to change that. Would 700/800 work in the rugged terrain? Sure! But it all has do with how much one is willing to spend. Anything is possible, all it takes is money...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top