Coolant113
Member
Not going to happen. Like GTR8000 stated, it would have happened with the transition to the new 700 system.
Morris County 700 MHz Simulcast Discussion
- Thread starter RocketNJ
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2005
- Messages
- 2,126
Morris has (3) licenses supporting its 700TRS. License WQXD784 was recently updated. The license now reflects (3) sites. I have been by #2 recently. Not on air nor built. 1 & 3 already built and on air. The RR DB is not importing site locations in radius system map. Dropping Pins on Google Maps instead.
- High Ridge Rd (Water Tank) Long Valley, Location name “Washington”
- (New) Rodger’s Road & RT206N, to be built, New Lattice Tower, Chester . 153’+45 M = 650MSL. Should produce decent coverage. Name “Seeing Eye”. This will be shared with Somerset County and its TRS.
- Mountain Ave (Lattice), Warren, Location name “Warren”
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2014
- Messages
- 2,564
and..... when "seeing eye" and the other Bernardsville sites come online, expect to see Bernardsville PD switch to Somerset Co TRS
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2005
- Messages
- 2,126
Ummm these Somerset sites all built? Cows will fly!🐮Off topic moooving on.
| Chester (paper) | Seeing Eye |
| Bernardsville (paper) | Flintlock Court |
| Bernardsville (paper) | Mountain Top Rd |
| Bernardsville (paper) | Pill Hill Rd |
| Bernardsville (paper) | Washington Corner Rd |
Not sure what you mean by that. First of all, the licensed locations only appear on the Site details map, not the System map. Second, I see the new Rogers Rd location just fine when looking at the 700 cell's map.
FT752
Member
That will be nice. If they stay self-dispatched, I wonder if they'll get put on Region 8 so that 11 and 12 remain on standby.
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2014
- Messages
- 2,564
Yeah that sounds reasonable.... Then that will leave Warren township and watchung as the only two towns in Somerset county that will not be on the TRS.
Midway through Livingston - not receiving them after going over the hill at Hillside Ave and W. Mt. Pleasant Ave.
FT752
Member
Ah yes, the two hens. I know Warren PD has access to the new Morris 700 system, but do you know if any other bordering Somerset County municipalities have access as well? If so, what ones?
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2014
- Messages
- 2,564
Unknown...
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2014
- Messages
- 2,564
I think the Riker Hill site is directional towards the west.... And the topography of that hill does not allow full signal along the ridge...
Crazy because I am not far from Riker Hill, but, it is what it is I suppose.
EagleStrikeX23
Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2023
- Messages
- 14
As an individual working on an organization with operations in Morris County, utilizing both mobile and portable radios, I find myself compelled to ask: what has led to the noticeable decline in performance of the recently implemented 700 system in comparison to the well-established UHF system? This observation of inadequacies is not unique to my own experience; it appears to be a sentiment shared by many, though not as strongly mentioned currently.
Historically, Morris County boasted an exceptional Phase 1 UHF simulcast site, renowned for its superior audio quality and expansive coverage. While occasional interference resulting from factors such as humidity and broadcasting channels did affect coverage intermittently, these issues were rare occurrences.
However, the transition to the 700 system has introduced a discernible deterioration in coverage, particularly in areas where the UHF system consistently performed strongly. Notably diminished Received Signal Strength Indicators (RSSIs) have emerged as a prominent concern, even in relatively central locations like a typical street on a clear day. Moving a subscriber unit to the UHF zone results in an instant RSSI of 100+, while the 700 system struggles to exceed the low 50s even on a mobile radio in certain areas. Strength is also not constant, even in the same exact location, whereas on the UHF cell reception was a constant strong unless you pushed the system to it limits such as going into a basement or deep inside an office building. While I am here, any idea if Morris County requires bi-directional amplifiers in buildings, and or assesses for it?
Although portable devices may exhibit robust signal strength outdoors, this strength swiftly dissipates upon entering buildings. Even attempting to transmit using a mobile radio from within the station has proven to be problematic. While I recognize that systems, for example, like the NJICS system may not be specifically tailored for indoor municipal coverage with the expectation that coverage is limited to the street, considering our local county system comprises 14 sites, my expectations are higher for this system. This situation is perplexing, especially given the anticipation that the transition to the 700 band should have brought about the coveted enhanced wall-penetration capabilities.
I acknowledge the rationale behind the shift to Phase 2 for spectrum efficiency, though it begs the question of if they really need twice as many channels, the audio quality is sub-par and deteriorates into unintelligible modulated digital noise greatly when the best practices aren't follow entirely. I am confident the amount of repetitions has increased two fold, especially, with weaker strength the packet loss is significant.
Given the substantial financial investment of millions of dollars, I am left confused by the decline in strength and coverage. The discrepancy between the expectations tied to this significant investment and the present reality raises valid concerns. So I ask, what might be the cause for these results?
Historically, Morris County boasted an exceptional Phase 1 UHF simulcast site, renowned for its superior audio quality and expansive coverage. While occasional interference resulting from factors such as humidity and broadcasting channels did affect coverage intermittently, these issues were rare occurrences.
However, the transition to the 700 system has introduced a discernible deterioration in coverage, particularly in areas where the UHF system consistently performed strongly. Notably diminished Received Signal Strength Indicators (RSSIs) have emerged as a prominent concern, even in relatively central locations like a typical street on a clear day. Moving a subscriber unit to the UHF zone results in an instant RSSI of 100+, while the 700 system struggles to exceed the low 50s even on a mobile radio in certain areas. Strength is also not constant, even in the same exact location, whereas on the UHF cell reception was a constant strong unless you pushed the system to it limits such as going into a basement or deep inside an office building. While I am here, any idea if Morris County requires bi-directional amplifiers in buildings, and or assesses for it?
Although portable devices may exhibit robust signal strength outdoors, this strength swiftly dissipates upon entering buildings. Even attempting to transmit using a mobile radio from within the station has proven to be problematic. While I recognize that systems, for example, like the NJICS system may not be specifically tailored for indoor municipal coverage with the expectation that coverage is limited to the street, considering our local county system comprises 14 sites, my expectations are higher for this system. This situation is perplexing, especially given the anticipation that the transition to the 700 band should have brought about the coveted enhanced wall-penetration capabilities.
I acknowledge the rationale behind the shift to Phase 2 for spectrum efficiency, though it begs the question of if they really need twice as many channels, the audio quality is sub-par and deteriorates into unintelligible modulated digital noise greatly when the best practices aren't follow entirely. I am confident the amount of repetitions has increased two fold, especially, with weaker strength the packet loss is significant.
Given the substantial financial investment of millions of dollars, I am left confused by the decline in strength and coverage. The discrepancy between the expectations tied to this significant investment and the present reality raises valid concerns. So I ask, what might be the cause for these results?
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2005
- Messages
- 2,126
I see you have no RR history, so it is difficult to determine much about, interests and knowledge, and so on. I have no association with Morris at all.
Most if not all systems undergo significant RF design criteria and engineering. These systems then meet or exceed a contracted amount of coverage that is defined within said contract.
After the system was built out, it was likely tested. This testing maps signal level and records them. Those levels will meet or exceed agreed upon values before system acceptance.
All of this is a matter of record, most likely. Suggest starting there and asking questions like the above intra-county first if you have not already done so.
It might have been helpful to be much more specific about trouble spots. The question as posed is impossible to even provide conjecture on.
One last item, the majority of systems are spec’d in street coverage. In building systems are significantly more expensive. You like likely have an in street system. I suspect you won’t have to look too far to find the following. A memo or training slide saying in street, not in building and be prepared and train on Tac or simplex channles and pre plan those buildings.
Most if not all systems undergo significant RF design criteria and engineering. These systems then meet or exceed a contracted amount of coverage that is defined within said contract.
After the system was built out, it was likely tested. This testing maps signal level and records them. Those levels will meet or exceed agreed upon values before system acceptance.
All of this is a matter of record, most likely. Suggest starting there and asking questions like the above intra-county first if you have not already done so.
It might have been helpful to be much more specific about trouble spots. The question as posed is impossible to even provide conjecture on.
One last item, the majority of systems are spec’d in street coverage. In building systems are significantly more expensive. You like likely have an in street system. I suspect you won’t have to look too far to find the following. A memo or training slide saying in street, not in building and be prepared and train on Tac or simplex channles and pre plan those buildings.
Last edited:
APX8000
Sarcastic Member
Post up a few locations where you noticed these trouble spots. I haven't noticed any issues on the system snd I'm all over the County...other than getting slammed from two or more sites causing some increases in BER.
EagleStrikeX23
Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2023
- Messages
- 14
Denville, Montville, Chathams, Green Village to name a few seem to all have poor portable coverage, especially inside structures (residences, businesses etc). It almost seems like this entire system has significantly decreased output compared to the UHF system. I am curious if the sites are operating at full power.
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2005
- Messages
- 2,126
I am not a subscriber. I am aware of the general differences of the old and new site locations along the southern border and eastern border.
The old site was on top of high tension tower on top of a ridge line in Long Hill. The nearest cross street was Long Hill Road. The site elevation was about 375’ above sea level. Utility tower was about 125’ AGL. Overall height about 500 MSL. When new electric utility towers went in, the old site came down. The ridge it was on likely made RF shadows in many places like Millington. The old site was closer to the Chatham’s and Green Village.
The new 700 MHZ sites covering these areas are in different locations.
Denville, Montville, I am not familiar with.
The old site was on top of high tension tower on top of a ridge line in Long Hill. The nearest cross street was Long Hill Road. The site elevation was about 375’ above sea level. Utility tower was about 125’ AGL. Overall height about 500 MSL. When new electric utility towers went in, the old site came down. The ridge it was on likely made RF shadows in many places like Millington. The old site was closer to the Chatham’s and Green Village.
The new 700 MHZ sites covering these areas are in different locations.
Denville, Montville, I am not familiar with.
EagleStrikeX23
Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2023
- Messages
- 14
Interesting, thank you for the context. That makes sense why portable coverage (including mobile indoors) is poor in the Chatham's/ Green Village area being that coverage is coming from a tower either in Livingston or off of Route 78. Hopefully the coverage is strengthened one day.
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2005
- Messages
- 2,126
Similar threads
