MARCS Performance Audit

[rcid1971]

Actually, it may be a company renting space on a state-owned tower....

Couldn't find any existence records wise on FCC either.

 

[kf8yk]

Couldn't find any existence records wise on FCC either.

Here's the (expired) license: WQQX778

This was one of those high frequency trader networks that built low latency microwave paths between NYC & Chicago. This was co-located on the MARCS Norwalk tower.

 

[N8WCP]

I do find this extremely interesting to read. From my understanding, The Tier 4 & 5 "partners" set the subscriber fees within "their tower system". I take it, for example, Summit County (Tier 4) is the one that receives those fees? How did that affect the audit report? I'm sure the audit was looking at the state's side, but I would imagine there has to be at least a statement about the big cities (Summit, Franklin, Montgomery) "stealing" a huge revenue base by owning the infrastructure.

MARCS was actively seeking partners to create a "system of systems" to offset their initial infrastructure cost, ongoing maintenance, and ongoing operating costs. So is it really "stealing revenue" when a county invests millions of dollars to build out a system, pays the maintenance and operating cost, and allows MARCS subscribers to roam on the system for free?

 

[N8WCP]

To answer your earlier question, no there is absolutely no mandate to go to MARCS, or any other system. Not even to go digital. Not required, despite what many vendors sales people say. The ONLY mandates in the last 15-20 years is narrowbanding for VHF and UHF Part 90, and the rebanding fiasco for 800 (which finally finished middle of last year.)
If a department is financially strapped, they should stay on VHF or UHF. It's a ***TON*** cheaper! And I have yet to see a case locally where interoperability was improved going to any 7/800 trunked system. If anything, it's been the exact opposite. Departments that used to be able to talk now can't, for various reasons. At least on VHF or UHF, it was a matter of programming, maybe getting an MOU letter if you don't have one. Now, programming has to go through MARCS or whatever system, and they're all really strict. The folks you buy the radios from can't do it anymore. Many times, we can't even fix simple issues, because it's behind the system key.

Some dealers have system keys. MARCS has numerous interoperability talkgroups users can use to talk to their neighbors if they want to. Yes VHF or UHF systems are cheaper to purchase and operate but if all your mutual aid neighbors move to MARCS you become an problem for them. Now someone needs to carry multiple radios or patch and a patch on a fire scene is not ideal.

 

[Jphila20]

To answer your earlier question, no there is absolutely no mandate to go to MARCS, or any other system. Not even to go digital. Not required, despite what many vendors sales people say. The ONLY mandates in the last 15-20 years is narrowbanding for VHF and UHF Part 90, and the rebanding fiasco for 800 (which finally finished middle of last year.)
If a department is financially strapped, they should stay on VHF or UHF. It's a ***TON*** cheaper! And I have yet to see a case locally where interoperability was improved going to any 7/800 trunked system. If anything, it's been the exact opposite. Departments that used to be able to talk now can't, for various reasons. At least on VHF or UHF, it was a matter of programming, maybe getting an MOU letter if you don't have one. Now, programming has to go through MARCS or whatever system, and they're all really strict. The folks you buy the radios from can't do it anymore. Many times, we can't even fix simple issues, because it's behind the system key.

Some of the the MARCS radios in the Cleveland area are dual programed to work on the GCRCN using the same RID's. GCRCN had to bring their programing equipment to the OSHP in Cleveland.
Would that mean MARCS would have to pay GCRCN and visa versa, or probably just call it even.

 

[rcid1971]

Some of the the MARCS radios in the Cleveland area are dual programed to work on the GCRCN using the same RID's. GCRCN had to bring their programing equipment to the OSHP in Cleveland.
Would that mean MARCS would have to pay GCRCN and visa versa, or probably just call it even.

Wouldn't that actually mean the user agency has to pay both radio system providers?

 

[wd8chl]

Wouldn't that actually mean the user agency has to pay both radio system providers?

That's exactly what that means, yes. If you want MARCS, you pay MARCS. If you want GCRCN, you pay them too. Etc, etc.

 

[rcid1971]

That's exactly what that means, yes. If you want MARCS, you pay MARCS. If you want GCRCN, you pay them too. Etc, etc.

I’ve always been fascinated by that.

Say hypothetically I’m Garfield Fire, I need to pay MARCS to access their network so I can provide mutual aid to Maple Fire? Shouldn’t Maple just operate on my network 🤣?

 

[wa8pyr]

Some of the the MARCS radios in the Cleveland area are dual programed to work on the GCRCN using the same RID's. GCRCN had to bring their programing equipment to the OSHP in Cleveland.
Would that mean MARCS would have to pay GCRCN and visa versa, or probably just call it even.

That's exactly what that means, yes. If you want MARCS, you pay MARCS. If you want GCRCN, you pay them too. Etc, etc.

There's typically no user fee for mutual aid access only. User fees only apply when an agency is using the system for primary, day-to-day operations.

 

[rcid1971]

There's typically no user fee for mutual aid access only. User fees only apply when an agency is using the system for primary, day-to-day operations.

If that's the case, then why such animosity between agencies and differing systems? If my fire department can have access specifically for mutual aid, why do system admins make it seem as if it's the end of the world to have to work with a neighboring, but different system?

 

[a417]

First Energy - $301,650 / 24.9 % of total and 120+ past due? Shut 'em off...that's what FE would do.

 

[N8WCP]

There's typically no user fee for mutual aid access only. User fees only apply when an agency is using the system for primary, day-to-day operations.

Cleveland charges a one time fee of $75 per radio to have your neighbors Cleveland talkgroups in your MARCS radio. Frankly the two systems need to merge. It make no sense Cuyahoga County has three competing trunk systems.

 

[Jphila20]

Cleveland charges a one time fee of $75 per radio to have your neighbors Cleveland talkgroups in your MARCS radio. Frankly the two systems need to merge. It make no sense Cuyahoga County has three competing trunk systems.

Its all about control.

 

[W8KIC]

First Energy - $301,650 / 24.9 % of total and 120+ past due? Shut 'em off...that's what FE would do.

There‘s that one problem that cannot be overlooked and that of course is who’s providing the electricity for the MARCS system?

 

[N8WCP]

There‘s that one problem that cannot be overlooked and that of course is who’s providing the electricity for the MARCS system?

They are just one of many companies serving Ohio. I'm sure AEP and Duke along with smaller providers are involved.

 

[wa8pyr]

Cleveland charges a one time fee of $75 per radio to have your neighbors Cleveland talkgroups in your MARCS radio. Frankly the two systems need to merge. It make no sense Cuyahoga County has three competing trunk systems.

MARCS would love that, but it won't happen. Cleveland is too independent-minded to merge with MARCS, much like Delaware County, Toledo/Lucas County, Mahoning County and Shelby County. I was frankly surprised when Columbus and Franklin County partnered with MARCS several years ago instead of partnering with Delaware County, or putting up their own system.

Frankly, it doesn't really matter; as long as Agency A can talk to Agency B on their system and vice-versa, it really doesn't matter whose system they operate on normally.

 

[N8WCP]

MARCS would love that, but it won't happen. Cleveland is too independent-minded to merge with MARCS, much like Delaware County, Toledo/Lucas County, Mahoning County and Shelby County. I was frankly surprised when Columbus and Franklin County partnered with MARCS several years ago instead of partnering with Delaware County, or putting up their own system.

Frankly, it doesn't really matter; as long as Agency A can talk to Agency B on their system and vice-versa, it really doesn't matter whose system they operate on normally.

"Cleveland is too independent" That was true under the Jackson administration, they now have a younger, more progressive thinking mayor. Three systems unnecessarily complicates programming and operations.

 

[W8KIC]

They are just one of many companies serving Ohio. I'm sure AEP and Duke along with smaller providers are involved.

Yes but are AEP, Duke and those smaller providers current on what they owe? FE has a mess on their hands and it’s almost entirely self inflicted.

 

[firemantom26]

I can not believe how these agency's don't pay their bills..

 

[wa8pyr]

"Cleveland is too independent" That was true under the Jackson administration, they now have a younger, more progressive thinking mayor. Three systems unnecessarily complicates programming and operations.

It's only complicated if someone is making it complicated. We've had multiple systems in Central Ohio for years, and we've never had a lick of trouble programming each others' systems into our radios, nor have we had any operational issues.

And honestly, a one-time fee per radio to Cleveland isn't unreasonable nor is it surprising; it does take time to configure the system to get radios added.

Sounds to me like someone is making a mountain out of a molehill; as long as everyone has the necessary stuff in their radios, there's no problem.