virtualspin315
Member
nacsr can you try 155.43125 and see if the static goes away! .
Oneida County VHF P25 Trunking?
- Thread starter MegaHertz315
- Start date
-
- Tags
- cnyicc
nacsr can you try 155.43125 and see if the static goes away! .
I have 155.43 plugged in. Not sure if it's rounded off. I will check and also dl you're tweaks.
Thank you.!
virtualspin315
Member
For Fire Control 154.3725 and 154.370. Tell me if the tweaks work for you. I Have all the Talk Groups for Oneida Simulcast of the CNYICC system with all the Radio IDs programed.
virtualspin315
Member
Construction Requirement Call Sign: KA7237 CNYICC Handheld radio patches for Fire Control
ULS Application - 0008317259 - ONEIDA, COUNTY OF - Notification
151.055
151.355
153.890
155.310
155.625
155.700
156.150
159.210
Call Sign: WPLV246 154.265 ONEIDA COUNTY CNYICC Handheld radio patches
ULS Application - 0008373451 - ONEIDA, COUNTY OF - Notification
154.725
155.145
156.000
159.285
159.450
ULS Application - 0008317259 - ONEIDA, COUNTY OF - Notification
151.055
151.355
153.890
155.310
155.625
155.700
156.150
159.210
Call Sign: WPLV246 154.265 ONEIDA COUNTY CNYICC Handheld radio patches
ULS Application - 0008373451 - ONEIDA, COUNTY OF - Notification
154.725
155.145
156.000
159.285
159.450
daredevil1
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2006
- Messages
- 65
155.43 and 154.37 are very staticy for me as well. I heard "radio service" testing the frequencies last week. 155.43125 makes no difference.
Last edited:
daredevil1
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2006
- Messages
- 65
I thought this system was supposed to enable all of the agencies to communicate with each other? Utica PD just had a File 1 pursuit that ended up in Deerfield, and they lost radio contact. State Police had to update Oneida with Utica PD's status.
Prospect62
Member
For sure. The guys on the street are semi-aware of the interoperability channels, certainly not yet well versed enough to use them in an unfolding event. This goes for just about any agency on the new system right now.
Also, I think there has been some confusion about my previous statements - I'm not talking about poor audio quality/degradation on the new P25 system. I referencing the old, CONVENTIONAL VHF high band system, specifically MRD and OC fire control. These are conventional. RX is 155.4300 for law and 154.3700 for fire that I listen to on my crystal-controlled Bearcat Electra IV. Hasn't changed in decades, even with the advent of the "new" P25 system they still haven't changed, the only thing that's changed is this "simulcast upgrade" which lately, seems to be degrading reception of the old, conventional VHF high band repeated frequencies. Prior to this, changes in PL and narrowbanding didn't appreciably change reception at all when using an old scanner. Oneida County's conventional VHF system has been pretty damn good for decades and even after narrowbanding and PL changes, it was still pretty damn good. The simulcast whatever-they-did is when real degradation in quality started, and even then it wasn't immediately after, it took awhile.
I'm told it's a well known issue that Motorola is allegedly "working on" - I'm just looking for insights if anyone hears anything as to progress in resolving the unknown issue.
It (the simulcast modification) was working very well for a few months but lately, audio on both MRD and county fire is intermittently choppy and covered by a weird electrical static. It comes and goes but never goes away completely. Seems to shift around between the CONVENTIONAL tower sites, which are Steuben, Kirkland, MCI (Cassville), & Florence, and is the same and present whether you're listening on a two-way radio or a scanner.
Last edited:
Keep in mind that crystal-controlled scanner is a wideband receiver. 155.4300 & 154.3700 are narrowband. If your hearing degrading reception from that scanner, don't blame it on the simulcast.
Hang in there! Let the techs tweak things. It'll get sorted out..... someday.
Last edited:
Simulcast radio is an interesting beast. Analog simulcast is frankly a pain.
Analog simulcast design is a series of tradeoffs. The coverage will never be perfect and there will always be areas of simulcast distortion. With greenfield designs, design engineers try to place as much of that overlap in places that don't matter as possible. Minimizing simulcast distortion is a product of the attributes of the receiver and rely significantly on the FM capture effect. Not all receivers are created equal. Oneida County was not a greenfield design and there for is a best effort. There will invariably be areas of distortion over populated areas, and without additional sites to shift the distortion this is the net result.
The true test of the system performance is the reception on a well made commercial radio, not on a scanner of any age.
Not withstanding the system bug that we are all aware of, the conventional simulcast is a operational improvement across the county, even though some areas have seen some degradation of performance.
Analog simulcast design is a series of tradeoffs. The coverage will never be perfect and there will always be areas of simulcast distortion. With greenfield designs, design engineers try to place as much of that overlap in places that don't matter as possible. Minimizing simulcast distortion is a product of the attributes of the receiver and rely significantly on the FM capture effect. Not all receivers are created equal. Oneida County was not a greenfield design and there for is a best effort. There will invariably be areas of distortion over populated areas, and without additional sites to shift the distortion this is the net result.
The true test of the system performance is the reception on a well made commercial radio, not on a scanner of any age.
Not withstanding the system bug that we are all aware of, the conventional simulcast is a operational improvement across the county, even though some areas have seen some degradation of performance.
Prospect62
Member
Keep in mind that crystal-controlled scanner is a wideband receiver. 155.4300 & 154.3700 are narrowband. If your hearing degrading reception from that scanner, don't blame it on the simulcast.
Hang in there! Let the techs tweak things. It'll get sorted out..... someday.
It (my old scanner) worked exceptionally well after the narrowband changes were made. It worked exceptionally well up until very recently when this "issue" appeared across all receivers in the county. You certainly can't blame the receiver when MRD is barely intelligible and OC Fire Control is clear as a bell on the same base station receiver, on a daily basis - and that's on a commercial radio, not a scanner. Therefore, I am positively blaming this on the simulcast, unless and until someone can show me how this is being caused by something else. By the way, since we're on the topic - is this even really a "simulcast" as was advertised or did they just put a repeater on the input frequencies?
I am however hopeful for a resolution and we are all hanging in there!
The peculiar thing is that, when the simulcast went live, the current degradation was not present - anywhere or on any receiver (that I was listening to). Then, one day, it appeared. And I have and do listen (and transmit) on well made commercial radios more often than I listen to my old Bearcat Electra. The problem exists, albeit in varying degrees of severity, on all of them.
I disagree (and this is my opinion) that the conventional simulcast is a operational improvement across the county. It may have been at first, but now it is not. Not until this matter is resolved. I don't think you'll find any disagreement with that statement from anyone except for a chosen few at 120 Base Road. I don't think you can acknowledge degradation in performance in one breath and then say it's an operational improvement in the next. Yes I can hear a car transmitting from four towns over now, but barely, and now I can barely hear the dispatcher either. We're worse off.
Last edited:
I cannot say I have had your experience at my location with any of the 3 simulcasted channels. This doesn't surprise me since simulcast distortion is very location dependent. What does surprise me is that Fire and MRD have different results. Unless there was something significantly wrong, the only thing that would explain that is different transmit antennas. I am not sure why they wouldn't have put everything a transmit combiner to a single antenna, but this IS Oneida County.
For what its worth I have MRD on today and I am hearing what is essentially static pops on the transmit. Is this what you are normally hearing? What I am hearing is NOT normal.
Simulcast distortion normally will have a slight buzz and the audio will motorboat. There are several places in the county I have driven through an heard that.
FWIW other local counties using the same analog simulcast setup for fire paging, Madison, Onondaga, Oswego, Cortland, Cayuga. I always encourage compare and contrast.
For what its worth I have MRD on today and I am hearing what is essentially static pops on the transmit. Is this what you are normally hearing? What I am hearing is NOT normal.
Simulcast distortion normally will have a slight buzz and the audio will motorboat. There are several places in the county I have driven through an heard that.
FWIW other local counties using the same analog simulcast setup for fire paging, Madison, Onondaga, Oswego, Cortland, Cayuga. I always encourage compare and contrast.
Again apples and banana's... First all of those counties are UHF, and have over 10 transmitters per county.... As someone else said more transmitters cause less distortion. Also being these went in years prior I would not be surprised that the technology in play is different. On top of technology every part of NY is different in topology and areas that need coverage. It makes it really hard to say xyz works better here than on this side of the state.
Prospect62
Member
That's what is striking me as so odd here. I am at my residence, listening to a GE MDX radio with an external antenna and Fire Control is clear as can be on all towers...meaning when they tone Camden it's as clear as when they tone Boonville or Waterville. Meanwhile, MRD is barely audible. "Static pops" is a good way to describe it, but there's static - but NOT poor signal static, it's distortion static. And the static is loud and clear, if that makes sense, which leads me to believe there isn't an issue with the broadcast of the signal - it's something else. I am in almost the center of the county, and I know topography plays a role but I'm basing this on years of having listened to these frequencies on the same receivers and not hearing this issue.
Consultation with others indicates that in other parts of the county, MRD is clear and Fire is NOT (opposite of what I'm experiencing) and in some places, fire and MRD are shoddy.
It's just a weird thing, and it's a recent thing - after narrowbanding, after the P25 system went live, after the simulcast worked great for awhile.
Last edited:
Sounds like we are hearing the same thing. I do have different radios that hear it differently too. I have an XTS2500 on it as well as several other scanners and amateur grade models. Fire Control is AWFUL today on my XTS
Unfortunately I haven't been into the GTR or MLC software to be able to pick out what is amis. It is beginning to sound like a a combination of issues. One thing that is always suspect is the transport. The audio has to go to Onondaga before coming back.
It does not help that Motorola is stretched thin and can't really spend any substantial time on it.
Lets just say I am taking mental notes for a project I am working on. "Lessons Learned"
FWIW, this was one of the only projects bought off state contract and not bid out with a performance spec.
Unfortunately I haven't been into the GTR or MLC software to be able to pick out what is amis. It is beginning to sound like a a combination of issues. One thing that is always suspect is the transport. The audio has to go to Onondaga before coming back.
It does not help that Motorola is stretched thin and can't really spend any substantial time on it.
Lets just say I am taking mental notes for a project I am working on. "Lessons Learned"
FWIW, this was one of the only projects bought off state contract and not bid out with a performance spec.
virtualspin315
Member
Fire Control is good in Utica. It is very directional . The Fire Control signal is fluctuating like crazy. The signal going into the repeater is solid but the repeater Output Power ERP or antenna signal polarization going haywire. The Fire Control signal is all over the place. If I adjust my antenna just right I can get Fire Control 100% full full quieting signal. When I move a little bit the signal is all broken up.
virtualspin315
Member
Wave Polarization and Antenna Polarization - Antenna Theory
Wave Polarization and Antenna Polarization
Understanding and Using Antenna Radiation Patterns | ASTRON WIRELESS
http://www.ece.mcmaster.ca/faculty/nikolova/antenna_dload/current_lectures/L05_Polar.pdf
Fire Control and MRD 100% full quieting here is Utica When I move two feet left or right it is broken up and static.
(vertically polarized or horizontally polarized) (linearly polarized or circularly polarized)
Wave Polarization and Antenna Polarization
Understanding and Using Antenna Radiation Patterns | ASTRON WIRELESS
http://www.ece.mcmaster.ca/faculty/nikolova/antenna_dload/current_lectures/L05_Polar.pdf
Fire Control and MRD 100% full quieting here is Utica When I move two feet left or right it is broken up and static.
(vertically polarized or horizontally polarized) (linearly polarized or circularly polarized)
As a side note, I'd like to point out that there are different antennas on different towers. Some directional, some not
Prospect62
Member
This is true of the conventional transmissions? If so that makes no sense.
My good fire control signal stays good regardless of antenna position or movement. My MRD AWFUL signal stays awful regardless of antenna position or movement. Things don't change until I go a couple towns over.
So strange. It's just so strange.
Typical. Good old Oneida County ramming the lowest bidder down everyone's throat because they got grant money.
If this is anything like Emer Services has done before, they'll struggle with this for a couple years, realize they made a big mistake, scrap the whole thing and spend more money on the next highest bidder. Then that won't work well either, but by then they'll just say "screw it" and everyone will have to live with it.
I cannot imagine a reason why the conventional signal would be modified in any way. The "simulcast" seemed like they just added a repeater on the input - why anything else was changed I don't know. But I'm not an engineer. All I know is we're worse off.
Last edited:
Yes it has to do with consoles. When the consoles are running on the CNYICC system, the are attached to the Onondaga Master site, which means all audio passes through the master site. The actual voting and simulcast control is done though a "Prime Site Controller" which is local to the county.
It wasn't even low bidder, it was no bid. It was a purchase order off state contract. There was some protections in it but no where near the engineering protections that you would normally get in a bid package. We all know whose brain child this project was.
Simulcast has nothing to do with "adding a repeater to the input." Simulcast is the simultaneous co-channel transmission of the same signal in an overlapping geographic area. Ideally the simulcast signal is timed so when coverage areas overlap the singal arrive at the receiver at the same time. When two signals arrive at the receiver at the same time their power is additive. When they arrive out of sync, the signal is reduced or cancelled. FM analog simulcast is very susceptive to variances in TX launch time, audio tone and location. The first two are easy to manage, the third can be nearly impossible in some areas and designs.
