M/A-COM OpenSky, Oakland County, Michigan

[MacombMonitor]

Is M/A-COM OpenSky being used successfully anywhere in the United States?

Oakland County Michigan has been trying to implement this system for more years than I can remember. They've had countless completion dates that are never met, and keep running into problems, and delays. The added cost are staggering, with no end in sight! Does anyone know what the problem really is?

Why did they decide to take exception to Michigan's "standard" for Public Safety Communications? Would it be better to scrap this project, and cut their losses? Could they re-use existing towers, and join Michigan's MPSCS?

 

[dmg1969]

Not sure if it has been a complete success anywhere in the country. I'm in Cumberland County, PA and all police departments moved to the OpenSky system in December, I believe. I know at least one department had trouble and went back to using the old low-band system until it was ironed out.

I had the scanner on last night and didn't hear any police transmissions on the old low-band frequencies. FD and EMS are still on low-band, but FD should be switching shortly. I think they are keeping the patch into the low-band system for dispatch and initial responders since many of them are volunteers and will not have access to the expensive OpenSky radios.

I really miss monitoring PD. I keep waiting to hear news that some scanner manufacturer gets the licensing to produce an OpenSky scanner, but I'm not holding my breath.

Dave

 

[RayAir]

Why couldn't Oakland County just use the Michigan State Police Digital System? I think Detroit Police are going to it. This would allow interoperability. Nobody else in Michigan uses the MA/COM Opensky. What a huge waste of money this has been. The system STILL isn't working and it was supposed to be up YEARS AGO! (Actually I am glad it don't work, because I enjoy listening to the current Motorola type 2 trunked system on my Trunktracker)

 

[RayAir]

Is M/A-COM OpenSky being used successfully anywhere in the United States?

Oakland County Michigan has been trying to implement this system for more years than I can remember. They've had countless completion dates that are never met, and keep running into problems, and delays. The added cost are staggering, with no end in sight! Does anyone know what the problem really is?

Why did they decide to take exception to Michigan's "standard" for Public Safety Communications? Would it be better to scrap this project, and cut their losses? Could they re-use existing towers, and join Michigan's MPSCS?

I have heard they tried to use the system for the U.S Open , when it was here , and they kept getting echo's when transmitting.

 

[sopdan]

Oakland County has given some of their answers to many questions at:

http://www.oakgov.com/radio/faq/

But I like their "CLEMIS Success Story" page better....

http://www.oakgov.com/clemis/news/Cyber_award.html

 

[dmg1969]

This is a message I just posted in the Pennsylvania forum, but I will post it here as well since it pertains to M/A-COM Open Sky.

I sent another e-mail to the guy at Tyco who I have communicated with in the past. In that e-mail, I asked him several questions including whether or not M/A-COM is courting scanner manufacturers to produce an OpenSky scanner and, if not, the availability of receive only radios for purchase by citizens. I received a reply this morning asking for me to call him. I did so and left a message. I will post whatever information he gives me as soon as he returns my call.

Dave G.

 

[MacombMonitor]

Oakland County has given some of their answers to many questions at:

http://www.oakgov.com/radio/faq/

I'm especially fond of this comment...

"When will the radio system be completed?

The total radio communication project is scheduled for completion in July 2005." :roll:

What did they do abandon their web site too? Or can't they get that to work either?

 

[MacombMonitor]

Oakland County has given some of their answers to many questions at:


But I like their "CLEMIS Success Story" page better....

http://www.oakgov.com/clemis/news/Cyber_award.html

CLEMIS Success Story

This page is under construction. :roll: ​

 

[dmg1969]

Yesterday afternoon, I received a call back from my contact at Tyco / M/A-COM regarding the possibility of an OpenSky scanner. He is in NorthEast Sales. We spoke for about 10 minutes and he was very forthcoming. He knows of no plans at the present time, at least on his level, for the production of an OpenSky scanner.

He said that the company met with several scanner manufacturers about 5 years ago and that they (the scanner folks) left shaking their heads after asking how OpenSky operates. He also got into a lot of technical stuff that I did not understand because I'm not a HAM or educated in trunking radio systems. After all...I've been dealing with a low band system for all of my scanning life. LOL!

He said "never say never", and it is possible as more and more systems are deployed. But, for now...there are no plans.

CRAP!

I am going to e-mail him back and ask that he keep my information in case he hears any suck talk.

Dave G.
Enola, PA

 

[MacombMonitor]

Nobody is coming to M/A-COM's defense here? That's sad! I'm not lurking here to enter into a flame war. I'm honestly looking for some answers, and justification to what's been going on in Oakland County, Michigan. Anyone?

 

[nhiester]

I hate to enter the open sky forums, because there are so many scanner listeners here that flame any open sky system because it is not cheap or easy to monitor.

However, I do believe that the open sky technology is a good thing for public safety. You must remember that the system is designed primairly for data with voice as an add on. This technology definately needs some refinement, but I would place a lot of the blame for coverage problems to the people who developed the bid specs. In most cases, systems like this do meet the bid specs, then users want more that what the bid specs called for. then the users make it out to be m/a com (or any vendor's) fault. Pennsylvania is a good example of this.

 

[MacombMonitor]

I hate to enter the open sky forums, because there are so many scanner listeners here that flame any open sky system because it is not cheap or easy to monitor.

However, I do believe that the open sky technology is a good thing for public safety. You must remember that the system is designed primairly for data with voice as an add on. This technology definately needs some refinement, but I would place a lot of the blame for coverage problems to the people who developed the bid specs. In most cases, systems like this do meet the bid specs, then users want more that what the bid specs called for. then the users make it out to be m/a com (or any vendor's) fault. Pennsylvania is a good example of this.

My thinking is that the problems Oakland County has been having are more related to politics, approvals, and funding, rather than technology. That's what I'm trying to confirm.

 

[Thunderbolt]

Nobody is coming to M/A-COM's defense here? That's sad! I'm not lurking here to enter into a flame war. I'm honestly looking for some answers, and justification to what's been going on in Oakland County, Michigan. Anyone?

I do know that one of the biggest headaches for the system developers, has been the city of Troy, especially around the Somerset Mall. In building coverage has been very poor, and is below all acceptable levels as stated in the contract. Therefore, M/A-COM has been working to resolve these issues. I believe that an in-building receiver will be installed as part of a voter network in Troy, to help eliminate these dead spots.

This is the last hurdle and if it passes system trials, the changeover will begin. The old Motorola system will be deactivated and the frequencies will be recycled into the new system. However, I am not holding my breath for that to happen today or tomorrow.

73's

Ron

 

[MacombMonitor]

I'm very familiar with the City of Troy, Michigan, and the structures there. However they are dwarfed when compared to a big city such as Detroit, and others. How were they able to implement this system in other large cities, or haven't they?

 

[MacombMonitor]

You must remember that the system is designed primairly for data with voice as an add on. This technology definately needs some refinement, but I would place a lot of the blame for coverage problems to the people who developed the bid specs. In most cases, systems like this do meet the bid specs, then users want more that what the bid specs called for. then the users make it out to be m/a com (or any vendor's) fault. Pennsylvania is a good example of this.

I would think the transmission/reception of "data" would be much more critical than voice. If the system can handle data, then voice should be a given. Maybe I'm wrong, but one missed bit of data, and the rest is garbage. Voice I would think, could tolerate a few stutters here, and there.

Many people have commented that the system was never intended for use within structures, and now you are saying the same applies for voice. If that was the case, just what was Oakland County originally intending to use the system for?

I think when they bid these systems, the number of towers, their locations, and height, are specked out to look, and sound appealing, and somewhat affordable. But when "real world" is a factor, then these requirements seem to grow overnight. I think MPSCS in Michigan has encountered similar growing pains. I think if the actual requirements were known in the beginning these projects would have never been started.

 

[N_Jay]

I would think the transmission/reception of "data" would be much more critical than voice. If the system can handle data, then voice should be a given. Maybe I'm wrong, but one missed bit of data, and the rest is garbage. Voice I would think, could tolerate a few stutters here, and there.

Voice and data fail differently on a digital radio system.

The OpenSky protocol was taken from CDPD which was never meant to be a voive protocol, but they seem to have it working well.

Most data systems are mobile only so it is hard to tell what the signal margin is for building penetration.

 

[MacombMonitor]

Voice and data fail differently on a digital radio system.

The OpenSky protocol was taken from CDPD which was never meant to be a voive protocol, but they seem to have it working well.

Most data systems are mobile only so it is hard to tell what the signal margin is for building penetration.

So do you think their original intent was to use it for something like MDT's only?

 

[N_Jay]

So do you think their original intent was to use it for something like MDT's only?

The system was originally designed for FedEx to be a mostly data system that could carry voice as a secondary use.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenSky

http://www.macom.com/Technical Articles/pdf/FedEx_Wireless_System.pdf

 

[SCPD]

but one missed bit of data, and the rest is garbage. Voice I would think, could tolerate a few stutters here, and there.

Both data and voice use error correction so losing a few bits is literally not a problem. With pure data you can request retransmission of lost packets. With voice - you can't. It would break up the continuity of the speech.

As far as MA/COM adding voice to CDPD as an after thought - I'm guessing that their intent was to build a (digital) voice and data system. They just happened to choose an existing (and well understood) format as the basis for their design.

-rick

 

[N_Jay]

Both data and voice use error correction so losing a few bits is literally not a problem. With pure data you can request retransmission of lost packets. With voice - you can't. It would break up the continuity of the speech.

As far as MA/COM adding voice to CDPD as an after thought - I'm guessing that their intent was to build a (digital) voice and data system. They just happened to choose an existing (and well understood) format as the basis for their design.

-rick

Remember, it was NOT M/A-COM who designed the system.
It was designed and deployed before M/A-COM came into the picture.

I would say it was a "DATA and voice" system. (Think about the needs a package delivery company like FedEx).