Latest:NY-PA AND Ma/com

Status
Not open for further replies.

iamhere300

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2004
Messages
1,346
Location
Chappell Hill TX
N_Jay said:
NYC is not one agency.:roll: :roll:

Wow.... I would have never guessed. I figured they were all on one frequency,
every agency in NYC merged into one. The sanitation department would do EMS
transports if they happened to be in the area, and the grass mowers with parks would do homicide investigations.


Alright, to break it down....

Kings (Brooklyn)
New York(Manhattan)
Queens
Bronx
Richmond

are all signed on as level 3 partners, meaning full system partners,


QUOTE
Full System Partners benefit from the state’s requirement of 97% on-road and 95% geographic mobile-radio coverage. These users will always be connected to the SWN through network compatible end-user equipment, such as portable radios, mobile radios and vehicular repeaters. Full System partners typically face outdated or deteriorating communications systems and require additional spectrum to cover high-priority areas. Adopting the SWN as their network helps solve these issues and provides all of the benefits of interoperable voice and data communication.

END QUOTE

So does anyone know what agency this is, are they still at this point going to be
involved as a level three partner, and what is the true meaning of life?
 
N

N_Jay

Guest
iamhere300 said:
Wow.... I would have never guessed.

Well if you are so frigging smart, why did you make this stupid comment?

iamhere300 said:
It states also that NYC is a level three partner, yet I see other threads where NYC is building out their own system, and buying vertex radios... Whats the deal there?

Some people??:roll: :roll:
 
N

N_Jay

Guest
iamhere300 said:
So does anyone know what agency this is, are they still at this point going to be
involved as a level three partner, and what is the true meaning of life?

Sure people know, but they are not always at liberty to say.

Additionally, some may have signed up just for interoperability and will still maintain their own systems.

On top of that some may be testing SWN top see if it can meet their needs.
 

Spec

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 9, 2003
Messages
740
Location
South Carolina
Sure people know, but they are not always at liberty to say.
Bingo

Additionally, some may have signed up just for interoperability and will still maintain their own systems.

On top of that some may be testing SWN top see if it can meet their needs.
Dead nuts on.
 

6m171

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
67
N_Jay said:
Sure people know, but they are not always at liberty to say.

Additionally, some may have signed up just for interoperability and will still maintain their own systems.

On top of that some may be testing SWN top see if it can meet their needs.

And on top of that yet again...
Some counties have signed on as Tier 3 partners purely for the purpose of having detailed and proprietary information shred with them so they can fully research the system. Such information is not shared with Tier 1 or Tier 2 partners.
 

sc800

Active Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Messages
632
I see.


I don't know as much about this situation as e911god, but I think Orange will NOT become a level 3 partner. The reason is this:


Orange has just spent millions of dollars in opening up a new 911 center and programming the current channels into the new consoles, and building a new antenna. If they were to change now to SWN, even if it was fully state funded, taxpayers would have a cow about wasted money, and heads would probably roll in the next election.
 

GTR8000

NY/NJ Database Guy
Database Admin
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
16,168
Location
BEE00
$2 billion statewide radio emergency plan flunks first test

$2 billion statewide radio emergency plan flunks first test

By Jay Gallagher
Journal Albany bureau
Saturday, December 15, 2007


ALBANY — The first phase of the state’s planned $2.1 billion communications system for police, firefighters and other emergency responders has flunked its first test, sparking some concerns about the viability of the project.

“Are we concerned? Absolutely,” said state Homeland Security Secretary Michael Balboni. “This has to work.”

Balboni said a test this summer and fall of the system in Erie and Chautauqua counties disclosed some flaws in training to use the equipment as well as “some gaps” in the signal.

But others say that the failure of a network test in the first phase was to be expected, and there’s no reason to think it won’t proceed as planned.

“There were problems identified. We’re dealing with them,” Larry Toole, the manager of the project for the state Office for Technology, said at a recent meeting of the task force that is overseeing the plan.

The system in Erie and Cattaraugus counties in the extreme western part of the state is a trial run that will be used to decide whether to build the network across the rest of the state over the next few years. Another test is set for February with a decision on whether to proceed likely by late April, officials said.

The state last year signed a contract with M/A-Com to build a wireless-communication system that will allow emergency responders to talk to each other all over the state.

The plan calls for building as many as 1,000 relay stations around the state — as many as possible on existing towers and buildings, but also some on newly built towers.

The plan is an outgrowth of concerns first voiced by the State Police about 20 years ago that troopers patrolling remote parts of the state were sometimes out of radio contact with other emergency personnel.

And the issue of emergency workers not being able to talk to each other was driven home to many people on Sept. 11, 2001 when police and firefighters responding to the World Trade Center attacks couldn’t communicate with each other via radios.

The project is to be paid for in part with some of the proceeds from the $1.20-per-month surcharge the state imposes on all cell-phone bills, although a state Budget Division spokesman acknowledged that the source of all the money needed to build the system hasn’t been identified yet.

Also not yet clear is how much local governments will have to pay for new radios to hook into the system. While some existing equipment likely can be used, some departments will probably have to purchase new ones, officials said.

Under the terms of the contract, the M/A-COM doesn’t get any money until the Erie-Chautauqua phase of the project is accepted by the state.

“I’m not concerned (by the test failure) because of the way the procurement was set up,” said Assembly Governmental Operations Committee Chairwoman RoAnn Destito, D-Rome, Oneida County. “We are protected in that respect. If it doesn’t work, there will be a decision made it’s a no-go.”

A spokesman for M/A-COM, a Lowell, Mass.-based telecommunications company, referred requests for comment to the state Office for Technology.

Even if the M/A-COM project flops, it’s important for the state to keep money set aside for another wireless project, said an official of the state Association of Fire Chiefs.

“We’re concerned that the state continue to recognize the value of a statewide wireless system,” said chiefs’ association executive director Thomas LaBelle. “We want to make sure they don’t take away this huge amount of money and use it on something else” if the M/A-COM project is scrapped.

Besides the technical issues, officials said the key to making the project work is training for the emergency responders who will use it.

“I have tried to impress upon the (Office for Technology) staff for many years that had to have outreach that would really educate the first responders,” Destito said. “I think they’ve come a long way...The first responders really did not understand and some still don’t understand how important the statewide wireless network is when there is a true disaster.”

:roll:
 

APX8000

Sarcastic Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2004
Messages
4,364
Location
AES-256 secured
But others say that the failure of a network test in the first phase was to be expected, and there’s no reason to think it won’t proceed as planned.
I don't know about you guys, but "failure was to be expected." I can't imagine coming up with this great idea, giving a full presentaion about how great this idea is, having others accept my idea and then saying...oh, but expect it to fail.

The bigger problem is the last part...
...and there’s no reason to think it won’t proceed as planned.
I think some people are getting their hands greased a bit. No matter how many times it fails and how much over budget it becomes, it will still "proceed as planned."

C'mon...when will the bleeding stop.

Oh, one more thing...I spoke with some high ups in Orange County and although they have signed on as a Level 3 partner as of now, they are "keeping their options open." I think they are beginning to realize that the county needs it's own system that the county can control and not have their hands tied by the state. They have this problem right now with a current vendor and leased equipment.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

studgeman

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
693
Level 3 doesn't necessarily mean the entire radio system. It can simply mean some radios on SWN for example, corrections transports.

On another interesting fiancial note, for a county/city to enhance SWN to meet the 97% portable standards that most systems are built to, they will have spent almost as much money as if they had built their own system.

Side note: It took two separate questions to get M/A Com to admit OpenSky is not in any shape or form Project 25 Compatiable. OFT, kept trying to say it was P25...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top