National Weather Service Radio Changes

[GlacierClipper]

http://www.fbodaily.com/archive/

Notice Date: 6/15/2004 Solicitation Notice



The National Weather Service (NWS) has a requirement to convert the radio units (transmitters, receivers, transceivers, and repeaters) employed in existing weather instruments from wideband radio units to narrowband radio units in the frequency band 162.0000 - 174.0000 MHz. There are numerous radio units of different models and different manufacturers which need to be converted in this manner. Either replacement units or upgrade kits are suitable means for conversion to narrowband operation. Replacement units and upgrade kits to be acquired must be accompanied by installation instructions and drawings to allow for NWS field technicians to perform the installations. Deliveries of replacement units and upgrade kits shall be made FOB Destination to the NWS headquarters facility in Silver Spring, Maryland within 120 days after contractual authorization to proceed. Solicitation DG133W-04-RP-0036 will be issued on or about June 30, 2004 and will close on or about July 30, 2004. The solicitation will identify the specific radio units to be converted and will provide for multiple contract awards. The solicitation will be available on FedBizOpps when it is issued. Please monitor FedBizOpps for release of the solicitation. Printed copies of the solicitation may be requested from the Contracting Officer. All responsible sources may respond to the solicitation by submitting a proposal which shall be considered by the agency.

 

[nmfire10]

The actual dates for when the narrowband requirements go into effect is so up in the air now, it will probably be years before anything comes of this. When they do go narrowband, it will mean all the existing weather radios will suffer in performance. They will still work but with reduced range, audio quality, and audio level.

 

[Voyager]

The actual dates for when the narrowband requirements go into effect is so up in the air now, it will probably be years before anything comes of this. When they do go narrowband, it will mean all the existing weather radios will suffer in performance. They will still work but with reduced range, audio quality, and audio level.

I agree with reduced audio level, and quality to some extent, but the range should be the same. There would also be increased adjacent channel interference on existing receivers if they add stations between the existing channels.

Joe M.

 

[loumaag]

The actual dates for when the narrowband requirements go into effect is so up in the air now, it will probably be years before anything comes of this. When they do go narrowband, it will mean all the existing weather radios will suffer in performance. They will still work but with reduced range, audio quality, and audio level.

I am not sure that this request has anything to do with NOAA Weather Radio (NWR). Of course this will be answered when the actual solicitation is issued (on or about June 30th), but I believe this is in reference to NWS radiosondes and also remote site weather gathering reporting transmitters and receivers. The infrastructure for the NWR is pretty well established (EAS, consumer owned equipment, etc.) and a change like that would be akin to changing FM Broadcast from WFM to FM.

 

[RADIOGUY2002]

NWS

I feel bad for all the people that bought weather rx's and are no longer going to rx it with out distoration. I would think that these freqs would not be changed. Its like a huge giant slap in the face, and so much for interagency communication. Another issue with fd, I see mutiple fire agencies facing this prolbem in the near future, who reily on the weather channels. Is there any funds, being made avaible to fire depts, for the switch to narrowband. Is motorola and the others going to make adjustments for all the Ht1000 that are in use, or other compaines for that matter.

Questioning, why now after some 20+ years of using wide band. Looks, like the scanner listners will be disbanding older units to convert as well. Perhaps, radio shack and uniden should make an effort to collect some of the older and out equipment for parts and other abilites.

 

[loumaag]

Re: NWS

I feel bad for all the people that bought weather rx's and are no longer going to rx it with out distoration. I would think that these freqs would not be changed. ...

If you think that, what distortion are you referring to?

 

[rjp3637]

Read the following quote carefully:

"radio units (transmitters, receivers, transceivers, and repeaters) employed in existing weather instruments"

The key words are [/b] existing weather instruments.

This does not apply to NWS public transmitters... they are NOT weather instruments...

RJP

 

[RADIOGUY2002]

NWS Distoartion

The audio quality is faded if not listening with a scanner or wx rx with narrowband capabilites, and in some case the rx ranage is weakend. While in other case its extended. There is a notable difference, I have a narrowband repeater programed in the scanner know, in both modes. Wide and narrow, most rx's are set for wideband. Thats what I mean

As far as instruments, let them defind it as what they mean as a whole. We know narrowband is coming, and this might just be one part of it, in any case.

 

[nmfire10]

Read the following quote carefully:

"radio units (transmitters, receivers, transceivers, and repeaters) employed in existing weather instruments"

The key words are [/b] existing weather instruments.

This does not apply to NWS public transmitters... they are NOT weather instruments...

RJP

OK then. Good. I'm sure it will happen sooner or later though.

 

[Thunderbolt]

I do know that the NWS and Homeland Security are now working together, to use NOAA Weather Radio as primary means for alerting the public to terrorism alerts. Moreover, they also want to expand the network by adding more stations to the system, which will help increase population coverage. Michigan alone, hopes to add seven new transmitter sites across the state to help cover the more rural areas.


The NWS does want to add more frequencies to the NWR network, and they are looking at whether to use narrowband technology, or to add more frequencies. The primary concern is easing congestion in some areas since the post 1994 build-out, when the network had a lot of stations added to boost coverage.


The first NWR receiver I had in the 1970s, had only two channels: 162.400 and 162.55 MHz. The third frequency, 162.475 being added in 1975 to help with overcrowding. Thankfully, the system was expanded even further in 1980s, when four more channels were added.


With the vast number of weather radios already in use, I honestly can't see them going to narrowband technology for several more years. However, the idea of adding more frequency pairs certainly is worth considering as all of the Homeland Security agencies now look at expanding the NWR System's usefulness.


73's

Ron

 

[loumaag]

Re: NWS Distoartion

The audio quality is faded if not listening with a scanner or wx rx with narrowband capabilites, and in some case the rx ranage is weakend. While in other case its extended. There is a notable difference, I have a narrowband repeater programed in the scanner know, in both modes. Wide and narrow, most rx's are set for wideband. Thats what I mean

As far as instruments, let them defind it as what they mean as a whole. We know narrowband is coming, and this might just be one part of it, in any case.

I guess you missed the point of my question to you. You said, "I would think that these freqs would not be changed." I will ask the question again, if you think that, why would distortion be a problem. That is, since you think they will not be changed to narrow band, why would there be a problem? BTW, I agree with you, I don't think they will change either. But, as I said earlier, we will know one way or the other by the end of the month.

 

[rdale]

There are no "weather instruments" that transmit on NOAA frequencies... Radiosondes aren't in that band either. This _is_ for NOAA Weather Radio.

 

[loumaag]

There are no "weather instruments" that transmit on NOAA frequencies... Radiosondes aren't in that band either. This _is_ for NOAA Weather Radio.

It is interesting to note that you mention NOAA frequencies. NOAA is the parent organization of the National Weather Service (NWS), the publisher of this solicitation notice. It is also the parent organization of the National Weather Radio (NWR) a completely different department (for budget and personnel purposes). NOAA was not mentioned in the notice and neither was the NWR. As I have said, over and over, we will know for sure at the end of the month, but I don't think NWR is affected at all.

As for there being no "weather instruments" using VHF, you are mistaken. ALERT uses VHF linked to SATCOM by tranceivers and repeaters (hmmm, sounds a lot like the above notice.)

 

[INDY72]

Not to mention the many weather monitoring stations linked to EOC's that use VHF Hi Band. Many of these are already using narrowband so that will make things easy since "Most" of the allocations in recent years in VHF are narrowband. So I will kick back and watch for new changes if any in the next month or so..... Enjoy!

 

[Voyager]

There are no "weather instruments" that transmit on NOAA frequencies... Radiosondes aren't in that band either. This _is_ for NOAA Weather Radio.

Quote from original post:

to allow for NWS field technicians to perform the installations

If this post relates to NWS transmitters, I somehow find it hard to believe that they are going to convert everyone's receivers to narrowband. There are too many political problems with doing that (if they mess up the conversion, if they get a non-working unit, if they lose a unit, Etc.) for them to take on this task.

There are no conversions required in a TRANSMITTER to allow SNFM operation. All that is needed are adjustements to limit the maximum deviation.

I also can't believe that they would change the NOAA system with only 120 days 'warning' to the public. The only reason to change to SNFM is to fit more stations between the existing channels. That would make all existing WX receivers, including those currently on the market, obsolete (again, I don't buy the speculation that they will convert everyone's receivers).

This speculation that NOAA broadcasts are affected does not make any sense. I really do believe that when they say weather INSTRUMENTS, they mean weather INSTRUMENTS, not broadcast transmitters. I'm also not aware of any transveivers or repeaters on NOAA broadcast frequencies. There ARE these devices on the weather instrument frequencies, however.

Joe M.

 

[Thunderbolt]

Here is a very recent article on the NOAA Weather Radio System, from USA Today:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-06-17-alert-usat_x.htm

 

[waynesewell]

Interesting that the weather radio concept will be expanded. I assume they are talking about just adding all these new codes to the existing SAME mechanism. I just hope they use a little common sense in their definition of "emergency". A few weeks ago, my radio woke me up at 5:30 in the morning for a #$%^ amber alert.

 

[rdale]

Amber Alerts will continue to get the 1050 tone to wake everyone up in some states - TX, CA, TN, etc. Most states still have some common sense left and realize that toning out a lost child results in the already limited number of people with a radio becoming an even smaller number due to unplugging...

 

[Thunderbolt]

I understand that with the newest weather radio from Midland, they give you the option of locking out SAME codes of your choice. I think this is a wonderful idea and when it comes time to replace my Uniden WX-100, I will definitely consider this as a key option over some other features.


I remember the old days when I had a regular 1050 Hz., tone alert radio, the NWS office in Detroit would issue a "Special Marine Warning" for Lake Huron from Bad Axe to Port Huron, which is well over 100 miles from my area. I would be so upset over it and many other people I know would always leave their radios unplugged, until there was a threat of severe weather in their area. However, I feel this really defeated the usefulness of having a NOAA Weather Radio in the first place.


73's

Ron

 

[waynesewell]

Interesting about the midland lockout capability. There's nothing wrong with my current radio, but a few more amber alert wakeups and I might git me the midland anyway.

I got a weather radio to warn me of danger, not to receive general public bulletins, no matter how noble.