Livingston County NY

Status
Not open for further replies.

hfd26

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 28, 2014
Messages
68
So something else I've found trying to listen to this system with the 436hp, is that u can not listen to other system in your favorite list or data base. Even after analysing the system it doesn't want to keep the quality when scanner other systems. I've tried it mobility and stationary. If you analyze the system then hold on the system it works fine and I've done this mobility and stationary. For the past couple days while I'm traveling within the county I've tried the less antenna approach with a 3" stubby attached to the scanner (no external) and had pretty good luck so far. Scanner seemed to work better clipped to the visor than sitting on the passenger seat or center console. Hopefully this little bit of extra info will help for anyone who is trying to listen to this system and others on the same scanner.
 

N0BDW

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
463
Location
Livingston Co., NY
So something else I've found trying to listen to this system with the 436hp, is that u can not listen to other system in your favorite list or data base. Even after analysing the system it doesn't want to keep the quality when scanner other systems. I've tried it mobility and stationary. If you analyze the system then hold on the system it works fine and I've done this mobility and stationary. For the past couple days while I'm traveling within the county I've tried the less antenna approach with a 3" stubby attached to the scanner (no external) and had pretty good luck so far. Scanner seemed to work better clipped to the visor than sitting on the passenger seat or center console. Hopefully this little bit of extra info will help for anyone who is trying to listen to this system and others on the same scanner.
Have you noticed any similar difficulty while listening to the Ontario county system?

If not I wonder what makes Livingston's unique in this regard.

I'm still trying to get an answer as to why we have to go into analyze mode to receive this system as well:

http://forums.radioreference.com/un...ceived-until-analyze-mode-entered-exited.html
 

hfd26

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 28, 2014
Messages
68
I have had no problems with the ontario county system, it works great outside the county and in the county
 

hfd26

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 28, 2014
Messages
68
I have had no problems with the ontario county system, it works great outside the county and in the county. If I can both counties I lose livingston
 

hfd26

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 28, 2014
Messages
68
I believe he was referin to any simulcast issues with ontario or having to analyze there system which I have none
 

Thunderknight

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
1,973
Location
Bletchley Park
I believe he was referin to any simulcast issues with ontario or having to analyze there system which I have none
Yes, and I was pointing out that they are different manufacturers. It's possible that there is a slight difference in the simulcast technologies in use, or if there are any manufacturer specific features in use that could be causing a difference.
 

KA1RBI

Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2008
Messages
544
Location
Portage Escarpment
Yes, and I was pointing out that they are different manufacturers. It's possible that there is a slight difference in the simulcast technologies in use, or if there are any manufacturer specific features in use that could be causing a difference.
Absolutely correct. Ontario (harris) and Livingston (moto) use two somewhat different simulcast modulation formats - both wholly different from non-simulcast C4FM, which is the only one that works properly with current consumer scanners. Harris simulcast uses "WCQPSK" whereas moto uses "LSM".

The LSM problem with scanners is apparently specifically caused by the added effects of US patent 6,061,574. The additions described in that patent (which I've personally observed in use by local moto "LSM" P25 systems) are incompatible with the FM demodulator/discriminator stage that's utilized in all consumer scanners....

73

Max

p.s. greetings and best regards to N2OPS, if you're out there reading this!
 

N0BDW

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
463
Location
Livingston Co., NY
Max:

I'm not sure I follow. The problem isn't that the scanners can't pick the system up at all (in fact they do so fairly well). The problem is that there are a couple of hoops you have to jump through in order to listen to the system:

1) You have to analyze the system, or be in discovery mode, before you'll be able to hear any transmissions (there is a separate thread about this that I linked above w/ video of the problem)
2) Apparently you cannot scan between this and other systems. You either have to hold on the system or have it be the only thing in your scan list. (I have not verified this myself -- I intentionally only have this system in the scanner and purchased it specifically for that purpose)

This part makes sense:

Yes, and I was pointing out that they are different manufacturers. It's possible that there is a slight difference in the simulcast technologies in use, or if there are any manufacturer specific features in use that could be causing a difference.
I did know Harris built the Monroe and Ontario systems but I didn't realize that Harris uses different technology for simulcast than Motorola. Thank you both for that explanation.
 
D

DaveNF2G

Guest
As someone once said, the great thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from.

Even P25 is not deployed in a "standard" fashion.
 

RF-Burns

Member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
291
I would suggest people living in Livingston, Monroe Counties, Ontario, Genesee, & Orleans County start doing research on Non Affiliated Scan using a Motorola Radio or a Harris Radio. Both are very easy to setup if you take the time to learn how to do it. With that said all LSM problems go away when using commercial gear. I currently have both Harris and Motorola radios programmed for Non Affiliated Scan on all the systems and they work great. Time to start thinking outside the box if local government wants to play games with these systems. Yes Motorola radios will work on Harris Systems and Harris Radios will work on Motorola Systems
 

N0BDW

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
463
Location
Livingston Co., NY
I would suggest people living in Livingston, Monroe Counties, Ontario, Genesee, & Orleans County start doing research on Non Affiliated Scan using a Motorola Radio or a Harris Radio. Both are very easy to setup if you take the time to learn how to do it. With that said all LSM problems go away when using commercial gear. I currently have both Harris and Motorola radios programmed for Non Affiliated Scan on all the systems and they work great. Time to start thinking outside the box if local government wants to play games with these systems. Yes Motorola radios will work on Harris Systems and Harris Radios will work on Motorola Systems
I'd love to have more radios on the system, but the cost is prohibitive.
 

ThePagerGeek

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 12, 2003
Messages
192
Time to start thinking outside the box if local government wants to play games with these systems.
I don't think it's governments playing games. I think it's more the scanner manufacturers not keeping up with the times to blame. Both simulcast formats (LSM vs WCQPSK) AND Phase 2 have been part of the P25 standard (open standard BTW) for quite some time.

The Unication G4/G5 can accommodate simulcast with a future upgrade to Phase 2 coming. Why can't the rest of the manufacturers? The entire premise of the market is to listen to communications by others. That means adapting to the technologies to do so.

Absent the scanner options, listeners will migrate to commercial solutions. Non-Affiliate scanning is one way.

I don't blame the government though for this one...
 

Thunderknight

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
1,973
Location
Bletchley Park
Time to start thinking outside the box if local government wants to play games with these systems.
There is no game here. Real radios on the system work fine. That's what the system is designed for.
If scanner manufacturers made scanners with the proper receiver designs for simulcast, they would work fine too.
 

RF-Burns

Member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
291
Maybe saying government playing games was a bad term., what I meant by that was Phase II.

Phase II for these rural counties where the fire departments are all volunteer is over board in my book. A lot of volunteers work hard for the money they have and on top of that they volunteer their time to the community. So when a spouse goes out on a call they would like to listen in, with Phase II it makes it hard and very expensive. I don't see a need for a rural county like Livingston, Genesee, Ontario, & Orleans which has operated on lowband since they got radios 40+ years ago now needs to switch to the most expensive most advanced trunking system available on the market. (Genesee & Orleans for 25 years on analog trunked systems)

A basic Motorola APX6000 on the used market are a thousand bucks, Harris XG-15s new are about 700 bucks, then comes the software issue. A G5 will cost you 800 bucks or a crap scanner will cost 350 - 500 bucks but you wont be able to understand what is being said because of LSM. That poor wife that is raising her 3 kids while the husband is at a house fire would like to hear the fire, that's a lot of money to spend. Hopefully Livingston County Communications will provide a direct feed to Radio Reference so families can still hear their loved ones.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ThePagerGeek

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 12, 2003
Messages
192
Based on my knowledge of all the systems you listed, Phase 2 actually makes sense for each of them. But I guess everyone has an opinion.

You should rant to the scanner manufacturers to improve their devices if Phase 2 is your hurdle. Also, most wide-area tactical P25 systems (regardless if they are trunking or conventional) are some flavor of simulcast. Not for nothing, but, LSM has been out since what... 2008-ish? Tell them to get with the times...
 

GTR8000

NYS Database Guy
Database Admin
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
9,288
Location
BEE00
Sorry, but no government agency should be taking into account "that poor wife" when planning their communication needs.

What they should take into account is how well the system will serve the people who are using the system on a daily basis.

TDMA can make a world of difference for a county like Livingston, where available frequencies for a countywide system are at a premium. This is particularly true for a simulcast VHF system that has to deal with coordination issues with Canada. Doubling the available voice channels from 3 with FDMA to 6 with TDMA is not at all insignificant.

Leave the sappy "tug on heartstrings" emotional sentiments out of the real world business of planning and deploying critical communication systems.
 

RF-Burns

Member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
291
You should rant to the scanner manufacturers to improve their devices if Phase 2 is your hurdle.
Phase II is not my hurdle by any means. All my current radios are Phase II. I agree scanner manufacturers should get going on coming up with LSM scanners.


"Leave the sappy "tug on heartstrings" emotional sentiments out of the real world business of planning and deploying critical communication systems"

You are missing my point. In an age where volunteers are on a steep decline you do what you can you keep people happy. If it's wasn't for them fire trucks wouldn't roll. Look at Genesee County, since the new system has gone into effect they have lost volunteers. Not to mention the Genesee County system performance is so bad they use simplex channels and some have bought VHF Analog radios just to communicate on the fire scene.

My simple point is going to such advanced systems in countries where money is a major issue is not worth it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ThePagerGeek

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 12, 2003
Messages
192
You're blaming a reduction in volunteers on the technology of the radio system??!?!

So much for a rational discussion...
 

Thunderknight

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
1,973
Location
Bletchley Park
It's easy for hobbyists (speaking in general terms about RR, not necessarily about this thread) to complain about phase 2, 700 MHz etc because they don't need to find the frequencies to operate FDMA or VHF, especially above line A. Not easy at all.
Sometimes it's not even possible to get a license on an existing frequency at a new in county site without Canadian objection. Try improving your coverage without adding sites :)
700 and 800 have set aside blocks where each country has primary status. Due to the population difference between upstate and Western NY and areas like Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal, we only get about 30% of the available block, so keeping spectrally efficient is very important. But at least the US has them as primary use.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top