Orange County Question

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dafe1er

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
789
Location
Off in a far away place, far from u.......
I have a friend that lives out in LOW, and said that he was able to monitor the security channel for them in the 30-50 mhz range, until about three months ago when it went silent. so after driving around this weekend in LOW, he noticed that they have antennas on their mobile vehicle units that are antennas for the VHF band (145.0000 etc) so he took my freq finder and his digital scanner and sat out by their building for a few hours and could not catch anything digital or analog for them, just LOW maintenance and Fire rescue which have not change as I know it cause I heard those channels working today.

I did a FCC look up, and they are showing the old frequencies for the security, and all the same channels for maintenance and what not, but nothing new for digital frequencies. I called the contact listed on the FCC search results, and the person said that there is no new frequencies, that they have paths. they also said that LOW was using analog and digital radios and are in the process of changing over to fully digital soon.

Now I admit, I am new to the whole digital scanning thing, but am I wrong in saying that there would be a actual digital frequencies that I would have to find, and then type into the HP-1 to hear them?

they were really reluctant to give me any information, as I do not know why, when all these freqs are part of the freedom of information act, and really for the price my friends that live in LOW pay to do so, should have the right to obtain the freq's if they ask for them, it is not like they are programming radios, just scanners.

Guess in short...lol I was wondering if anyone might have the new freq's, or might be able to shine a little light on this for me and my fellow listeners?

Thanks,
Dafe.
 

dtscho

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Aug 7, 2001
Messages
1,571
Location
Fredericksburg, VA
Lake of the Woods is using MOTOTRBO digital on 152.3150. This type of digital cannot be received by any scanner, unfortunately. I don't know for sure, but I would imagine this frequency replaces 35.9600, which was previously used for security. Maintenance is still active on 151.8050 (analog).

Dave
 

Dafe1er

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
789
Location
Off in a far away place, far from u.......
How do we know it is MOTOTRBO? I can not see anywhere that says (this channel three maintenance frequency as it is know for LOW 152.3150) is in fact under MOTOTRBO.

Also why would some half assed security company have the need to use MOTOTRBO? Seems like they got something to hide!

why would the radio company not just say to me when I talked to them that they are on a listed freq, but are also using MOTOTRBO so nobody would be able to hear them? Seems like a better story to use than what they told me.
**
So if there is no scanner that can listen to this due to the MOTOTRBO, what non scanner device would or can?

Thanks for your information, it has made some sense to me so far, now to try to explain this to my friends...lol

Dafe.*
 

fredva

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Messages
1,430
Location
Virginia/West Virginia
Last edited:

jcooke

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 19, 2003
Messages
45
Location
Fredericksburg,Va
Are the MOTOTRBO considered part of the Federal Interoperability Standards for getting funds from the Dept of Homeland Security for radio system upgrades in Orange County?
 

c5corvette

Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
702
Location
*REBANDED*
Are the MOTOTRBO considered part of the Federal Interoperability Standards for getting funds from the Dept of Homeland Security for radio system upgrades in Orange County?
No, MOTOTRBO is commercial grade equipment and frankly it should not be used for public safety because of its lack of interoperability.
 

JRayfield

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
791
Location
Springfield, MO
MOTOTRBO equipment is NOT just "commercial grade". It meets the same MIL-STD specs that the high-tier XTS and XTL series of radios meets. And it actually exceeds the IP-standard rating of the XTS series of portables.

John Rayfield, Jr. CETma

No, MOTOTRBO is commercial grade equipment and frankly it should not be used for public safety because of its lack of interoperability.
 

c5corvette

Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
702
Location
*REBANDED*
MOTOTRBO equipment is NOT just "commercial grade". It meets the same MIL-STD specs that the high-tier XTS and XTL series of radios meets. And it actually exceeds the IP-standard rating of the XTS series of portables.

John Rayfield, Jr. CETma
Those specs have nothing to do with jcooke's originial inquiry about public safety interoperability, but thanks for your input.
 

JRayfield

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
791
Location
Springfield, MO
May be, but then why did you make the comment about MOTOTROBO not being 'commercial grade'? I didn't bring this up 'out of the air'....

I'm just clearing up a misconception that many people seem to have and made the comment based on your post.

John Rayfield, Jr. CETma

Those specs have nothing to do with jcooke's originial inquiry about public safety interoperability, but thanks for your input.
 

c5corvette

Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
702
Location
*REBANDED*
I was just answering the guys question.

The misconception is, you sell MOTOTRBO equipment and your website is full of hype making people think MOTOTRBO is the best bang for the buck in public safety.

Quit replying to any and every thread where someone questions MOTOTRBO being used for public safety.

Bottom line is, those of us in public safety don't want others in public safety using MOTOTRBO. No misconception!!! We want to make that clear, especially here in the Virginia forum.
 

radioman2001

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
2,795
Location
New York North Carolina and all points in between
Hey JRayfield do you do nothing but look on the boards looking for anything anti MOTOTRBO. It appears from all your posts that's all you do.You provide no other useful information. All should know that you are a MOTOROLA dealer, pushing MOTOTRBO. To all take what JRayfield says with a grain of salt. I wonder if Motorola pays him to do so.
The OP's post about interop still stands, MOTOTRBO is NOT interoperable with P-25 which is REQUIRED for Federal monies.
 
Last edited:

JRayfield

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
791
Location
Springfield, MO
P25 is not required for federal money in all cases. Your statement is simply not true. I know this for a fact.

Yes, I reply to posts where misinformation regarding MOTOTRBO has been posted. So? And I provide no 'useful' information? Interesting. I point out misinformation about MOTOTRBO, that's not 'useful'? I guess not to someone who wants to believe misinformation.

John Rayfield, Jr. CETma

Hey JRayfield do you do nothing but look on the boards looking for anything anti MOTOTRBO. It appears from all your posts that's all you do.You provide no other useful information. All should know that you are a MOTOROLA dealer, pushing MOTOTRBO. To all take what JRayfield says with a grain of salt. I wonder if Motorola pays him to do so.
The OP's post about interop still stands, MOTOTRBO is NOT interoperable with P-25 which is REQUIRED for Federal monies.
 
Last edited:

JRayfield

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
791
Location
Springfield, MO
And I was just clearing up some misinformation posted by you. And yet, you call me on making my post. Amazing.

So, now you're representing every person involved in public safety in the country and trying to dictate what they want to use. Wow! You're really special.

I've personally spoken with many people in public safety who think very highly of MOTOTRBO and are very happy to be using it. They would very much disagree with your opinions on this.

My websites are not full of any 'hype'. Yes, my websites have information on them pertaining to MOTOTRBO, and it's factual information, including 'live' audio clips of MOTOTRBO and analog, showing how they compare. That's not 'hype'. It may be factual information that you don't like, but it's not 'hype'.

John Rayfield, Jr. CETma

I was just answering the guys question.

The misconception is, you sell MOTOTRBO equipment and your website is full of hype making people think MOTOTRBO is the best bang for the buck in public safety.

Quit replying to any and every thread where someone questions MOTOTRBO being used for public safety.

Bottom line is, those of us in public safety don't want others in public safety using MOTOTRBO. No misconception!!! We want to make that clear, especially here in the Virginia forum.
 

c5corvette

Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
702
Location
*REBANDED*
I was just clearing up some misinformation posted by you.
There was absolutely no misinformation about MOTOTRBO anywhere on this post when you decided to reply.

So, now you're representing every person involved in public safety in the country and trying to dictate what they want to use. Wow! You're really special.
I am not representing any county, or anyone else for than matter, I just know (not by opinion, but fact) by interfacing with my various counterparts here in Virginia that its a shame when public saftey agenices in the Commonwealth of Virginia select hardware that is not compatiable with the majority of neighboring jurisdictions.

If I were to have a personal opinion, it would be as follows: dealers should not be allowed to continue to post directed comments to thread after thread regarding a particular product. (There are other dealers, vendors, software companies, manufacturers on here that don't lurk on every category waiting to talk about how good thier product is when someone else comments on it.)

To all take what JRayfield says with a grain of salt. I wonder if Motorola pays him to do so.
I agree with radioman2001. Take everything said with a grain of salt. Visit Motorola 2-Way Radios - Springfield, MO, Implementing New and Emerging Technology if there is any doubt /V\ is lining his pockets.
 

JRayfield

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
791
Location
Springfield, MO
I work with small, rural public safety agencies almost every day, servicing their equipment and systems. Many of these agencies have poorly-performing analog systems that are quite 'sub-standard' as compared to what they really need.

These agencies can't even begin to afford P25 equipment and systems (especially the systems, the infrastructure). Using P25 radios in analog mode doesn't improve their systems' performance one little bit.

By taking the attitude that, if an agency can't use P25 digital radios, then they must stay on analog, then in my opinion, people are, in effect, insisting that these agencies must continue to use something that can even be dangerous in some cases - all based on the idea, that 'some day', these agencies may have to interoperate with someone on P25 digital systems. I just can't accept that 'interoperability' must come before 'operability'.

And I definitely can't accept people promoting mis-information about something, to promote their own opinions, and then getting mad when that mis-information is corrected by someone else.

John Rayfield, Jr. CETma
 

JRayfield

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
791
Location
Springfield, MO
The last 'mis-information' that was posted, to which I commented, was that MOTOTRBO radios are only 'commercial grade'. That IS 'mis-information'. I have asked Motorola employees specifically about this, and their answer was that if the radio meets the MIL-STD's then it's 'public safety grade'.

MOTOTRBO is not the only DMR-based product on the market. Any DMR-based system will provide much better performance and features than analog systems, at a price that small rural agencies can often afford.

And the purpose of my posts are to correct mis-information.

John Rayfield, Jr. CETma

There was absolutely no misinformation about MOTOTRBO anywhere on this post when you decided to reply.



I am not representing any county, or anyone else for than matter, I just know (not by opinion, but fact) by interfacing with my various counterparts here in Virginia that its a shame when public saftey agenices in the Commonwealth of Virginia select hardware that is not compatiable with the majority of neighboring jurisdictions.

If I were to have a personal opinion, it would be as follows: dealers should not be allowed to continue to post directed comments to thread after thread regarding a particular product. (There are other dealers, vendors, software companies, manufacturers on here that don't lurk on every category waiting to talk about how good thier product is when someone else comments on it.)


I agree with radioman2001. Take everything said with a grain of salt. Visit Motorola 2-Way Radios - Springfield, MO, Implementing New and Emerging Technology if there is any doubt /V\ is lining his pockets.
 

c5corvette

Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
702
Location
*REBANDED*
I work with small, rural public safety agencies almost every day, servicing their equipment and systems. Many of these agencies have poorly-performing analog systems that are quite 'sub-standard' as compared to what they really need.

These agencies can't even begin to afford P25 equipment and systems (especially the systems, the infrastructure). Using P25 radios in analog mode doesn't improve their systems' performance one little bit.

By taking the attitude that, if an agency can't use P25 digital radios, then they must stay on analog, then in my opinion, people are, in effect, insisting that these agencies must continue to use something that can even be dangerous in some cases - all based on the idea, that 'some day', these agencies may have to interoperate with someone on P25 digital systems. I just can't accept that 'interoperability' must come before 'operability'.

And I definitely can't accept people promoting mis-information about something, to promote their own opinions, and then getting mad when that mis-information is corrected by someone else.

John Rayfield, Jr. CETma
It wears me out to continue to reply... No one ever said that 'interoperability' must come before 'operability'. And I don't see anyone can say analog radio is dangerous. Maybe an old run down analog system could be dangerous, but in general an analog system is no more dangerous than any other type of radio system.
 

c5corvette

Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
702
Location
*REBANDED*
The last 'mis-information' that was posted, to which I commented, was that MOTOTRBO radios are only 'commercial grade'. That IS 'mis-information'. I have asked Motorola employees specifically about this, and their answer was that if the radio meets the MIL-STD's then it's 'public safety grade'.

MOTOTRBO is not the only DMR-based product on the market. Any DMR-based system will provide much better performance and features than analog systems, at a price that small rural agencies can often afford.

And the purpose of my posts are to correct mis-information.

John Rayfield, Jr. CETma
And another... your quote is not exactly what was said. Furthermore, if Motorola defines 'public saftey grade' as any radio that meets the MIL-STD then they are the ones who we should consider misinformed. Heck, I am sure someone can create a scanner that meets MIL spec -- but again, it won't do a cop or a firefighter any good if they can't talk to anyone with it.
 

JRayfield

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
791
Location
Springfield, MO
When someone insists that an agency either use P25 equipment or analog, based on the argument of 'interoperability', then in effect, "interoperability" is being placed in front of "operability". I know many public safety people in our area that agree with this.

Whether an analog system is 'dangerous' or not, has to do with the way it's designed. Many analog systems can't be designed, due to the fact that it's old technology, to give the necessary coverage for 'safe' operations. On the other hand, the newer digital systems can be designed, at very low cost if they aren't P25, to give the needed coverage. That's the difference between analog systems and the newer digital technologies. These newer digital technologies allow for system designs that were never possible before, for smaller rural agencies.

John Rayfield, Jr. CETma

It wears me out to continue to reply... No one ever said that 'interoperability' must come before 'operability'. And I don't see anyone can say analog radio is dangerous. Maybe an old run down analog system could be dangerous, but in general an analog system is no more dangerous than any other type of radio system.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top