Louisville Metrosafe

[ofd8001]

The RR database has the correct information for the Louisville analog system. I have programmed my scanner and receive the system ok. There's really not much of interest to me on that system and it is usually locked out on my scanner.

The only emergency folks that are on it are: the airport FD, airport police and metro emergency management agency (and I've never heard them on it, and can count the number of times I've seen an EMA person carrying a radio on one hand).

 

[jerk]

I am now hearing simulcasting of various EMS and Fire groups. The audio is terrible and there is an almost 5 second delay between the conventional channel broadcast and the repeat on Metro.

ID-11 is rebroadcasting 462.9750 MED-10

AL

 

[ofd8001]

They are field experimenting with with a portion of the MetroSafe system. Using the Motobridge from MetroSafe Phase I, they have bridged EMS 10 to one of the 800 talkgroups, Fire 1 to another and Fire 2 to a third.

Listening to this on a scanner does sound bad in some cases and in others it is not too bad.

I have been issued one of the new radios to help with the testing. It sounds considerably better on the real thing than on a scanner, however there are some VHF & UHF radios that are patched over to 800 sound worse than others. I guess the reason why things don't sound great on a scanner is due to the bridging, scanners aren't as great as the real thing and garbage in from a funky VHF or UHF radio means garbage intensified on the bridge.

Some folks around me who have listened to the radio I have say the sound quality is better and others say its worse than the current system.

It was really weird to hear the delay at first, and it took some getting used to it. However going from one 800 radio to another 800 radio also has a delay involved. I guess that's all part of digitizing and un-digitizing the signal. You really don't notice it unless you hear the person talking on the radio because you are right next to him or have another conventional radio with you.

Personally I am impressed with what I have seen thus far, even though there are only 3 sites up and running. I haven't been in the situation where I could get out with my VHF but not the 800 radio. I'm even to the point where all I'm using is the 800 radio.

 

[jerk]

They are field experimenting with with a portion of the MetroSafe system. Using the Motobridge from MetroSafe Phase I, they have bridged EMS 10 to one of the 800 talkgroups, Fire 1 to another and Fire 2 to a third.

Personally I am impressed with what I have seen thus far, even though there are only 3 sites up and running. I haven't been in the situation where I could get out with my VHF but not the 800 radio. I'm even to the point where all I'm using is the 800 radio.

They have good coverage to the North, all the way up to the 20-21 mile marker on I-65. It's even better than the old Metro analog system.

AL

 

[scannerfreak]

They are field experimenting with with a portion of the MetroSafe system. Using the Motobridge from MetroSafe Phase I, they have bridged EMS 10 to one of the 800 talkgroups, Fire 1 to another and Fire 2 to a third.

Listening to this on a scanner does sound bad in some cases and in others it is not too bad.

I have been issued one of the new radios to help with the testing. It sounds considerably better on the real thing than on a scanner, however there are some VHF & UHF radios that are patched over to 800 sound worse than others. I guess the reason why things don't sound great on a scanner is due to the bridging, scanners aren't as great as the real thing and garbage in from a funky VHF or UHF radio means garbage intensified on the bridge.

Some folks around me who have listened to the radio I have say the sound quality is better and others say its worse than the current system.

It was really weird to hear the delay at first, and it took some getting used to it. However going from one 800 radio to another 800 radio also has a delay involved. I guess that's all part of digitizing and un-digitizing the signal. You really don't notice it unless you hear the person talking on the radio because you are right next to him or have another conventional radio with you.

Personally I am impressed with what I have seen thus far, even though there are only 3 sites up and running. I haven't been in the situation where I could get out with my VHF but not the 800 radio. I'm even to the point where all I'm using is the 800 radio.

Huh, Interesting. I bet that radio came loaded with a bunch of talkgroups :wink: :wink:

 

[windigofer]

Coverage to the north is good, coverage towards the southeast is...iffy (we can receive the old Metro system just fine, the new one has typically required the use of a yagi antenna to get usable signal). May have to check it again now that active voice is being tested.

It's possible that my scanner may have been getting overloaded, or I'm just in a bad area for signal. (Fern Creek area, off Hurstbourne; I'm aware there is a repeater near I-64 and Hurstbourne, so overload MAY be an issue; will have to play with the attenuation).

 

[jcpd9720]

when OFD8001 talks on his 800 mHz brick from the pathway of Oz (Follow the yellow brick road, follow the yellow brick road...), it sounds crystal clear. I was hearing him for a week or two on it and didn't even know it.

 

[ofd8001]

Huh, Interesting. I bet that radio came loaded with a bunch of talkgroups :wink: :wink:

The only talkgroups are those that our radio shop friends programmed, and there's not much more than ten. Again all we are doing is "playing around" with the radios to see what they will do.

The only towers up and running (both receive and transmit) are downtown (which is why there is good coverage north) Hurstbourne/I-64 and off Dixie Highway. So that's why Fern Creek may be weak.

When it's all said and done in 2007, we may see between 8 and 10 sites.

 

[ofd8001]

Latest and greatest as of February: The Multi-Agency Voice Radio System Request for Proposal "hit the street" this past week. Responses are due by the end of March.

 

[LouisvilleScanMan]

Sorry, had a little trouble with my first post.

 

[LouisvilleScanMan]

Metrosafe Timebomb?

I've read that computer controled trunked systems when suddenly overloaded with radio traffic (such as when a major emergency or disaster happens) can automaticly shut down to protect themselfs or even CRASH! leaving the responders with only vary limited range simplex communications.Is there any truth to this? If there is then Mayer Jerry's new Metrosafe system is anything but safe.

 

[ofd8001]

I would hope that radio system manufacturers are aware that major emergencies mean major communications and they design their systems with that in mind. Particularly when we have told them we need a new system to help us communicate during major emergencies.

As I understand it, if the computer that controls the trunking component fails, then radios switch over to default channels like your basic repeater system. From what I know, I think there may be around 30 or so frequencies, which is more than we now have. So even in a failed trunking mode, we will have a better system than we now have.

Having said all that, anything and everything is subject to breaking, even the string between two tin cans. Any public safety professional worth his salt should know to not rely on any specific piece of equipment to do his or her job, and should have the ability to adapt and overcome adverse conditions. After all, we were able to function before the advent of radios. As an aside, it is very common at a fire scene for someone to inadvertently key up a radio, thus preventing radio usage, and we still do what needs to be done.

On the otherhand, it's not beyond me to throw a malfunctioning radio as far as I can.

 

[LouisvilleScanMan]

Well for Louisville's sake I hope you're right.If a major emergency or disastar should occur and the metro communications system does go down leaving you with only simplex it will most likely cost lives.On a small scale yes emergency services can function with out radios but if what I'm talking about happens it will cripple the city's police, fire and EMS units.

 

[unitcharlie]

I hope the good folks in City Hall understand the needs of and have listened to the concerns of the people on the streets who will depend upon METROSAFE... I cringe everytime I think about some radio sales dude talkin' "latest and greatest" and then read about systems that don't work when they are needed most because the auxiliary power was also the latest and greatest but doesn't work in a six inch rain storm.... or the ensuing flood. I truly hope Metrosafe is a nasty weather secure system.... the approaching hallmarks in the major flood cycle that seem to plague Kentucky every 20 years or so come hauntingly to mind., as does the prospect of an interesting spring storm season with this cold start.

 

[LouisvilleScanMan]

Yes that's what I'm talking about, the city getting conned into something that could put the lives of emergency workers as well as citizens in jeopardy.As a Louisville resident I'm vary concerned about this. I hope that I'm wrong but if I'm not anybody with emergency communications knowledge i.e. REACTers, ARES/RACES members and other emergency and disastar volunteers better get ready because if Metrosafe goes down CB and Ham radio will be the only means of communication out of and in to the Metro Louisville area.

 

[mastr]

I'm a "ham" but I can't see that being a viable replacement in the rare event of a completely failed Metrosafe system.There are several other systems that provide substantial (admittedly not 100 percent) coverage of the Louisville Metro area that could be made available on relatively short notice. The cellular telephone system might even work to some degree,given a local failure of some vital part of the Metrosafe system. A quick look in the FCC database shows many other public safety licensees in Jefferson county, not to mention the Feds, who are not listed there.

I'm not a fan of trunking for public safety use, for a number of techincal reasons, one of which is my preference for a radio system where a quiet channel equates to a vacant channel. It is entirely possible for a trunked system to be "full" of users while one particular talkgroup is quiet (seemingly ready for use), but no open channel exists for it to use. Having said that, if I had to use one the proposed Metrosafe system is as good as any I know of, and far ahead of many.

 

[ofd8001]

I think the interests of the public safety committee were well represented on the MetroSafe radio committee. In addition to myself, there were some 4 other fire folks on the committee. Also represented were police agencies in the form of officers on the street. EMS was invited, but did not show up (any system they get will be better than what they now have).

Several of us fire folks have been issued 800 Mhz digital trunking units, just to give the skeleton system (3 sites versus 10-13) a "test drive". There are some talkgroups bridged into the existing system. For the most part, I'm using only the 800 radio and leaving the VHF radio in the car, when at scenes. No issues thus far. In fact I'm quite impressed with what I've seen on a partial system.

At this stage, I feel comfortable with the system. There proposal identifies buildings of concern and areas of concern, as well as a detailed testing system. One main caveat we have stipulated is that the new system has to cover everything the existing system is now covering, otherwise that will be a failure.

 

[LouisvilleScanMan]

One thing this new system needs to do is eliminate most or all of the common "dead spots" in Louisville.I hear all the time on the scanner units and dispatch unable to communicate with each other due to ground terrian.I know that you can't fix all of the dead spots but a lot of them could probably be fixed by adding more repeaters in those areas but I guess that's already part of the plan.

 

[ofd8001]

Yup, there's some problem areas that need attention, especially for the EMS UHF system, as well as the Fern Creek, Fairdale, South Dixie, Worthington, Eastwood and Harrods Creek areas for all systems.

What we did when the RFP was being developed was to ask all agencies where their problem areas were. From there we came up with about 3 pages of difficult buildings and areas. We've even indicated some buildings that need coverage in elevators, it's that tight of a spec.

I think we are really going to test this system carefully and completely before we sign off on it.

Like I said earlier, there are 3 sites up for testing right now. We may have as many as 13 receiver/repeater sites when its all said and done. Some of the aforementioned trouble areas have done some testing with these 3 sites. So we'll have a list of the problem areas so that when the remaining sites are set up, we can try them again. It's like a year's worth of testing before the system even goes in. Thus we won't have to be relying upon theoretical, and computer generated coverage estimates.

I've been to enough funerals for public safety folks. I don't want to go to any more because of an inadequate system.

 

[LouisvilleScanMan]

Amen to that ! And the EMS system DEFINITLEY needs better coverage.