W4UVV
Member
FYI I received a phone call this morning from one of my county radio sources. Here is the latest info. Harris Corp. has loaned an unknown number of portable radios to the county to "test" obviously for selected members of the VFD, EMS and PD. The portables are tri-band believed to be for 150-173 mhz., 450-470 mhz. and 700 mhz. The FCC used to require new Phase 2 trs licensees to incorporate 700 mhz. for inter-operability purposes. I assume it still does.
Currently the $4.3 million county radio system is analog simulcasted on 7 towers using microwave PTP links. Anyone interested can search RR for past posts as to comm issues related to the current system.
Harris Corp. is a very aggressive bidding competitor for new Virginia trs installations which I remembered from the past Pittsylvania Co. trs happenings before their contract was awarded to Harris. As best I recall,. prior to the contract award, Harris provided an impressive number of technical services and aid to the county which included, visual aids, site surveys for various scenarios and ERP projections from different trs locations, etc. I believe Harris had a prior related presence in the Pittsylvania Co. area. Whatever Motorola provided to the county it was not to the same degree that Harris did.
I should have realized Harris would use its' aggressive pro-active bidding policy which has been successful in the past. Why not?
I also was reminded this morning that the "new" Sussex Co./VSP/prison trs is Harris. Actually I did not know that. I thought it was a Motorola trs. Very interesting. I never have had any problem receiving and decoding any trs properly with the 536. That might explain why using my Uniden 536 monitoring this Harris trs has had signal decoding problems. It has a constant 5 bar input signal level with the transmitter site located only 12 air miles away; Phase 1 or emissions are used on the non-encrypted talkgroups or probably Phase 2 for encrypted. Sometimes I receive Talkgroup IDs display fine with all attributes but no audio; sometimes with choppy audio and maybe an occasional acceptable transmission. The 536 should ignore/bypass an encrypted transmission which it does fine all on other trs I monitor.
There are no Phase 2 only trs and only this one Harris trs within my monitoring area. Using either "P25 Standard" or "P25 X2 TDMA" settings seem to be the same results. Whether "auto" or manual threshold settings ranging from 7,8,9 and whether modulation is "auto", "FM" or "NFM" don't seem to make any noticeable differences in signal reception quality. A local scanner friend who also uses a 536 and monitors this trs occasionally has been experiencing the same reception problems as I have.
So my friend and I both have definite reasons for concern and apprehension of having to deal with a Harris trs reception issues. I have 95 Favorite lists programed in my 536 many of which are trs. This is the ONLY trs I have had reception issues and it is a Harris trs. If I did something wrong in my setup for reception, I don't what it was. I've tried various setup combinations with basically poor reception results at best.
Time will tell one way or the other but my scanner friend and I are not optimistic as to the outcome.
John
W4UVV
Currently the $4.3 million county radio system is analog simulcasted on 7 towers using microwave PTP links. Anyone interested can search RR for past posts as to comm issues related to the current system.
Harris Corp. is a very aggressive bidding competitor for new Virginia trs installations which I remembered from the past Pittsylvania Co. trs happenings before their contract was awarded to Harris. As best I recall,. prior to the contract award, Harris provided an impressive number of technical services and aid to the county which included, visual aids, site surveys for various scenarios and ERP projections from different trs locations, etc. I believe Harris had a prior related presence in the Pittsylvania Co. area. Whatever Motorola provided to the county it was not to the same degree that Harris did.
I should have realized Harris would use its' aggressive pro-active bidding policy which has been successful in the past. Why not?
I also was reminded this morning that the "new" Sussex Co./VSP/prison trs is Harris. Actually I did not know that. I thought it was a Motorola trs. Very interesting. I never have had any problem receiving and decoding any trs properly with the 536. That might explain why using my Uniden 536 monitoring this Harris trs has had signal decoding problems. It has a constant 5 bar input signal level with the transmitter site located only 12 air miles away; Phase 1 or emissions are used on the non-encrypted talkgroups or probably Phase 2 for encrypted. Sometimes I receive Talkgroup IDs display fine with all attributes but no audio; sometimes with choppy audio and maybe an occasional acceptable transmission. The 536 should ignore/bypass an encrypted transmission which it does fine all on other trs I monitor.
There are no Phase 2 only trs and only this one Harris trs within my monitoring area. Using either "P25 Standard" or "P25 X2 TDMA" settings seem to be the same results. Whether "auto" or manual threshold settings ranging from 7,8,9 and whether modulation is "auto", "FM" or "NFM" don't seem to make any noticeable differences in signal reception quality. A local scanner friend who also uses a 536 and monitors this trs occasionally has been experiencing the same reception problems as I have.
So my friend and I both have definite reasons for concern and apprehension of having to deal with a Harris trs reception issues. I have 95 Favorite lists programed in my 536 many of which are trs. This is the ONLY trs I have had reception issues and it is a Harris trs. If I did something wrong in my setup for reception, I don't what it was. I've tried various setup combinations with basically poor reception results at best.
Time will tell one way or the other but my scanner friend and I are not optimistic as to the outcome.
John
W4UVV
Last edited:
