Nah, as easy and cheaply (ADP) that encryption can happen, I'm sure it wasn't intention. Particularly since in one place simulcast is bad but 100 yards away, it is pristine.I do wonder "if" somewhere in their thinking, this came in to it?
Public safety entities don't pay licensing fees to the FCC.There's hardly any simulcast systems outside of US and there's probably a reason to it. Several transmitters on the same frequency will always be more difficult to receive as they at some point will cancel out each others radiowaves and also the interference between them requires special radios, and scanners, to receive properly. Those who listen to simulcast systems will at occasions hear that patrols and users ask for a transmission to be repeated beacause they had a drop out of the signal.
In other countries they have the same amount of sites, which is needed to get full radio coverage, but each site use their own frequencies, if they have overlapping coverage. When one site doesn't have coverage the digital radio have measured the signal strenght from three other sites and instantly switch to the strongest one of them without the user noticing anything.
In a simulcast system all users are on the same frequency, which has a fixed amount of max users before it overloads and stops working. In non-simulcast systems the users are divided up to the different sites and will have a much higher capacity. That means that simulcast system have to use more channels to get the same capacity as non-simulcast system. So the advantage of more efficient use of frequencies are mostly lost due to the higher number of channels needed to accommodate all users. If there was a system with few users and few channels it would anyhow require another license for the additional coverage where FCC normally could have given the same frequency to another user, with another license fee, that where far away from the first users coverage. So simulcast have never been an option in other countries as it's no real advantage to use that system type.
While that's true, but for public safety entities the FCC requires that frequencies be "coordinated" so that there isn't overlap or other harmful interference. The frequency coordinators will charge fees for their services. So an initial license has a cost associated with it.Public safety entities don't pay licensing fees to the FCC.
Yes, I realize that. There is administrativa that needs to be completed (like in any country) and there are costs to identify and secure channel resources which can be handled by private companies, consultants, industry associations, quasi governmental organizations, local governmental groups (RPCs,) etc. PS just doesn't pay a fee for the use of the spectrum.While that's true, but for public safety entities the FCC requires that frequencies be "coordinated" so that there isn't overlap or other harmful interference. The frequency coordinators will charge fees for their services. So an initial license has a cost associated with it.
"Back in the day" our fire department was looking to get a repeater. We had to go to two different coordinators because we were trying to use a frequency assigned to a different service (I think it was game wardens). So that was an experience and expense.