Rockwall County getting Harris P25 P2 system

[Russell]

Lubbock appears to have additional licenses. Check out WPFW709 listing 5 sites. Clicking on the FRN 0004541355 should return it all.

WPFW709 may list the old emission designator but there's a chance the sites are still in use.

 

[kv5e]

OK, four of those are in Lubbock County, with the other two that would be six.

There's more density in the overlap areas so they have mitigated SDS in the higher population density areas with lower sites.

Guess my original estimate was pretty close. Should have looked up the FRN, but I am working now.

Craig

 

[twobytwo]

There isnt that many sites for Lubbock as licensed.Some of this is speculation and may not be correct, but it may be close.This may get complicated so bear with me.
The site at 7400 University is an TV tower. The city no longer leases this location , so it no longer used.
The site in Bailey CO is located at some water wells and may be used to communicate with personnell when they are up there. There is some microwave licenses between Lubbock and the wells that may relay transmissions. Mileage between the wells and Lubbock is around 70 miles.
So that leaves 3 sites for WPFW709. I dont think all were used. This is part of the original EDACS system.WQNE 264 was added later when it was first licensed there was only 5 or so frequencies to have additional coverage.
When the plan to put in the Phase 2 system the plan was to have the two sites (west of town and 23rd St) to cover the county.The other sites would probably be abanonded when the new system was to be implemented.Becuse of all the problems,it was taking longer than expected so the city just had a blanket license to cover all emissions and sites.
All of the small towns in the county uses the Lubbock system in one form or another, including the county VFD. The exception is Slaton,for the reason I dont know.

 

[kv5e]

Well, two sites with the HAAT listed in the license (west of town and 23rd St) for a simulcast is not a good design and if they are having problems I am not surprised.

700/800/900 MHZ simulcast should use sites under 150' AGL and have sufficient down tilt to prevent excessive radiation past where the contour of the next site begins.

If you skimp on the number of sites and try the old schema of a couple of sites with appreciable HAAT, then you can be assured of SDS.

You cannot go cheap on simulcast systems, they require more sites and expertise to engineer.

 

[2wayfreq]

Well,
The only thing with Harris XG/XM radios has been glitchy hardware and component failures on the system boards. The XM Touch Screen heads have been OK. I have however, seen failed HHC-731 Control Head mics almost every week. Either it's a "Lost MRU" on the screen or the keypad stops working. Endless repair send-outs.
I'm not trying to be biased...But Motorola APXs have had ZERO failures so far.

 

[mostinterestingman]

Well,
The only thing with Harris XG/XM radios has been glitchy hardware and component failures on the system boards. The XM Touch Screen heads have been OK. I have however, seen failed HHC-731 Control Head mics almost every week. Either it's a "Lost MRU" on the screen or the keypad stops working. Endless repair send-outs.
I'm not trying to be biased...But Motorola APXs have had ZERO failures so far.

Not to mention god awful noise cancellation as well as the infrastructure itself in Phase 2 just doesn't seem to work.

 

[mostinterestingman]

Well, two sites with the HAAT listed in the license (west of town and 23rd St) for a simulcast is not a good design and if they are having problems I am not surprised.

700/800/900 MHZ simulcast should use sites under 150' AGL and have sufficient down tilt to prevent excessive radiation past where the contour of the next site begins.

If you skimp on the number of sites and try the old schema of a couple of sites with appreciable HAAT, then you can be assured of SDS.

You cannot go cheap on simulcast systems, they require more sites and expertise to engineer.

So if HAAT is so critical on TDMA Simulcast, how does TXWARN have so many 130-160 METER antenna heights on P2LSM without issue?

 

[fasteddy64]

Well,
The only thing with Harris XG/XM radios has been glitchy hardware and component failures on the system boards. The XM Touch Screen heads have been OK. I have however, seen failed HHC-731 Control Head mics almost every week. Either it's a "Lost MRU" on the screen or the keypad stops working. Endless repair send-outs.
I'm not trying to be biased...But Motorola APXs have had ZERO failures so far.

Great.
I have 15 pallets of 75 and 25 potables and mobiles at the shop waiting to go into service on our EDACS system, with a phase II migration coming next.

I may retire early at this rate.

 

[kv5e]

So if HAAT is so critical on TDMA Simulcast, how does TXWARN have so many 130-160 METER antenna heights on P2LSM without issue?

It would all depend on the specifics of which sites and where they are located.

Rural areas you have a little more leeway, and they could be using directionals to splay outwards from a core area of higher site density.

In urban areas with higher density/higher LULC values, lower sites and more of them are a better choice.

TXWARN covers a lot of different terrain and LULC types, you can *stretch* coverage in some areas with higher sites by leveraging terrain features (if they are present).

Simulcast design is complex, your propagation prediction tools are one way to leverage lower site density once you get some data.

You find that in the more urban/cluttered areas lower sites are the rule for the most part. In rural areas (the Pine Curtain) the conifer trees create much higher LULC losses and with rolling terrain higher sites are needed.

Again, TXWARN is an enormous system, it depends on a particular area and what your propagation tools suggest you can do to decrease site density.

We should probably get back to Rockwall as I started this off topic jag.

I am glad that Garland/Mesquite went with /\/\ for some of the reasons you have proffered.

Craig

 

[mostinterestingman]

It would all depend on the specifics of which sites and where they are located.

Rural areas you have a little more leeway, and they could be using directionals to splay outwards from a core area of higher site density.

In urban areas with higher density/higher LULC values, lower sites and more of them are a better choice.

TXWARN covers a lot of different terrain and LULC types, you can *stretch* coverage in some areas with higher sites by leveraging terrain features (if they are present).

Simulcast design is complex, your propagation prediction tools are one way to leverage lower site density once you get some data.

You find that in the more urban/cluttered areas lower sites are the rule for the most part. In rural areas (the Pine Curtain) the conifer trees create much higher LULC losses and with rolling terrain higher sites are needed.

Again, TXWARN is an enormous system, it depends on a particular area and what your propagation tools suggest you can do to decrease site density.

We should probably get back to Rockwall as I started this off topic jag.

I am glad that Garland/Mesquite went with /\/\ for some of the reasons you have proffered.

Craig

Excellent insight, was not off topic, just using it as an example for comparison of successful deployment. I'm curious how well the XG75 / XG100P function on a Motorola P2LSM system. There are not many true P2 harris systems out there to see how well the APX platform integrates with a Harris Phase 2 backbone.

 

[PlanoTX]

Excellent insight, was not off topic, just using it as an example for comparison of successful deployment. I'm curious how well the XG75 / XG100P function on a Motorola P2LSM system. There are not many true P2 harris systems out there to see how well the APX platform integrates with a Harris Phase 2 backbone.

The basic radio functions of Harris or Motorola will work on either P-25 platform. They are certified to do so. However, many of the bells and whistle features (call alert, etc) will only work when used with their own systems.
IE. Motorola on Motorola P-25 system -all functions work. Harris on Motorola P-25 and vise versa can be a challenge.

 

[mostinterestingman]

The basic radio functions of Harris or Motorola will work on either P-25 platform. They are certified to do so. However, many of the bells and whistle features (call alert, etc) will only work when used with their own systems.
IE. Motorola on Motorola P-25 system -all functions work. Harris on Motorola P-25 and vise versa can be a challenge.

Correct, however, I'm actually not even talking about the basics in the TIA suite of standards, i'm just talking PTT. Since Harris doesn't seem to be able to get their radios to even work on their own system.

 

[nd5y]

ULS Application - PubSafty/SpecEmer/PubSaftyNtlPlan,806-817/851-862MHz,Trunked - 0007438290 - ROCKWALL COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE

 

[hiegtx]

ULS Application - PubSafty/SpecEmer/PubSaftyNtlPlan,806-817/851-862MHz,Trunked - 0007438290 - ROCKWALL COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE

License issued: ULS License - Trunked Public Safety 700 MHz License - WQYH552 - ROCKWALL COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE

Showing five sites, for the smallest county in the state. I guess they want to guarantee coverage.

 

[nd5y]

They also have a pending application for some 800 MHz frequencies that includes vehicular repeaters.
ULS Application - PubSafty/SpecEmer/PubSaftyNtlPlan,806-817/851-862MHz,Trunked - 0007459574 - ROCKWALL COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE

 

[KevinC]

License issued: ULS License - Trunked Public Safety 700 MHz License - WQYH552 - ROCKWALL COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE

Showing five sites, for the smallest county in the state. I guess they want to guarantee coverage.

You can blame a lot of this on Phase 2 TDMA as it takes more sites to maintain the same level of coverage compared to what they currently have.

 

[Russell]

Rockwall County P25 is staged.

 

[hiegtx]

You can blame a lot of this on Phase 2 TDMA as it takes more sites to maintain the same level of coverage compared to what they currently have.

No disagreement with that.

I just find it interesting that for Rockwall, five sites are indicated, whereas for Kaufman County, which is multiple times the size of Rockwall, there are only three in their simulcast Phase II system.

 

[SCPD]

Unless Terrell and Forney plan to migrate into the system in the future.

 

[28056]

Unless Terrell and Forney plan to migrate into the system in the future.

Those idiots didn't even go in together on a system, don't see them joining anyone else.


It does look like Forney will get a site for the Mesquite/Garland system on the Forney tower in exchange for Forney being able to use the Mesquite/Garland system if their system goes down.