Stark County Ohio

eng645

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 18, 2005
Messages
77
Location
Wilmot,Ohio
#1
Below is what is showing on the map for Marcs's towers, does that mean it will be coming online soon?

11 1041618 MAST 76.8 78.3 377.0 8847 DAY DRIVE
 

mtindor

OH/WV DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
7,208
Location
Carroll Co OH / EN90LN
#2
Below is what is showing on the map for Marcs's towers, does that mean it will be coming online soon?

11 1041618 MAST 76.8 78.3 377.0 8847 DAY DRIVE
I don't know what in the world that line is supposed to mean. But the "new" Stark Co simulcast is online (but with just testing right now).

It's in the MARCS-IP database, site 2-063. Program it into your scanner.

Tomorrow morning they are supposed to be doing some testing. So you will hear some traffic if you program it in.

https://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?sid=6643
- site 2-063 Stark County

Mike
 

eng645

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 18, 2005
Messages
77
Location
Wilmot,Ohio
#3
Stark County

It is now showing a Marcs's tower at the Day Avenue location outside Navarre, Ohio

The numbers above are the tower height and elevation.
 
Last edited:

eng645

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 18, 2005
Messages
77
Location
Wilmot,Ohio
#5
This site will cover the south west corner of Stark County in addition it will also cover a section of Wayne, Holmes and Tuscarawas counties.
 

mtindor

OH/WV DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
7,208
Location
Carroll Co OH / EN90LN
#6
Below is what is showing on the map for Marcs's towers, does that mean it will be coming online soon?

11 1041618 MAST 76.8 78.3 377.0 8847 DAY DRIVE
Where is this map of MARCS towers that you are referring to? Rather than post a bunch of numbers that nobody can make much sense of (I know what the numbers are, but it still does me little good), post the map -- or a link to it.

The Canton-Stark County Motorola Type II system is going away by the end of this year. It is being replaced by a very large P25 simulcast site (2-063 on MARCS) and a standalone site in Minerva.

The simulcast is online. There was testing last week. There will be testing this week. I doubt you will have to wait until the end of the year to hear Stark Co / Canton users on the new simulcast site. They appear to be ahead of schedule.

Mike
 

GLDietzII

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 31, 2004
Messages
7
Location
Massillon, Ohio
#8
Mike,
What you're saying is "Canton-Stark County" Motorola Type II and the entities that own this are going to force these agencies to switch to the MARCS IP system? I had talked with a couple MPD officers a few weeks ago and they said that they were going to the MARCS system (which requires a monthly fee) and then encrypted - which really upsets me - I may very well go to the mayor and safety / service director and start asking questions as to why . . . at any rate, why the demise of a system that has worked well? If you know! Thanks
 

mtindor

OH/WV DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
7,208
Location
Carroll Co OH / EN90LN
#9
Mike,
What you're saying is "Canton-Stark County" Motorola Type II and the entities that own this are going to force these agencies to switch to the MARCS IP system? I had talked with a couple MPD officers a few weeks ago and they said that they were going to the MARCS system (which requires a monthly fee) and then encrypted - which really upsets me - I may very well go to the mayor and safety / service director and start asking questions as to why . . . at any rate, why the demise of a system that has worked well? If you know! Thanks
Yes, that is what I"m saying. Their old system is old technlogy at its End of Life. Canton-Stark have partnered with MARCS. It's using much of infrastructure that belongs to Canton-Stark and already in place. But totally new radio system underpinning it all. P25 instead of Motorola Type II.

It'll be an 11+ site, 15+ channel P25 simulcast for Canton-Stark County with an additional standalone site for Minerva coverage.

Mike
 

GLDietzII

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 31, 2004
Messages
7
Location
Massillon, Ohio
#10
Awhile I could easily argue that the system is at end of life, considering some agencies are still using the old FM conventional radio's, that's not what I want to do nor is it my point. Where are these other, smaller, few, agencies going to come up with the $$ to buy new radios and then come up with the $$ to pay for monthly subscription costs?
 

mtindor

OH/WV DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
7,208
Location
Carroll Co OH / EN90LN
#11
Awhile I could easily argue that the system is at end of life, considering some agencies are still using the old FM conventional radio's, that's not what I want to do nor is it my point. Where are these other, smaller, few, agencies going to come up with the $$ to buy new radios and then come up with the $$ to pay for monthly subscription costs?
Probably questions that you should pose at a council meeting. It's a done deal though. It's happening though. They aren't looking back . There might be agencies trying to figure out how to purchase new equipment, but it's not stopping progress. My guess is that by now most agencies have already gotten it figured out, for better or worse.

Mike
 

GLDietzII

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 31, 2004
Messages
7
Location
Massillon, Ohio
#12
Agree - I don't think that it's a bad idea - regardless if the Motorola Type II is out of date or not, jumping on the MARCS system will enable better communication between agencies because they'll be using the same radio system - my only point of contention with the city of Massillon is going encrypted - I understand TAC channels being encrypted (Canton is totally encrypted - their PD) which I understand why for their agency, but the city of Massillon? Unless there is a drug cartel moving into the city; and even if so, I doubt they care to buy a $600 police scanner to do their business and listen to a police radio . . . . non the less - it'll be an interesting transition.
 

Volfirefighter

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
499
Location
Robertsville, OH
#17
Getting a good deal of distortion on my PSR 600. Any advice on how to clear this up without shelling out for an SDS 100 or Unication pager? Would "dumbing down" my antenna setup to try and receive only the closest tower work?
 

mtindor

OH/WV DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
7,208
Location
Carroll Co OH / EN90LN
#18
Getting a good deal of distortion on my PSR 600. Any advice on how to clear this up without shelling out for an SDS 100 or Unication pager? Would "dumbing down" my antenna setup to try and receive only the closest tower work?
Aside from getting an SDS100, it's all about voodoo and a whole lotta luck. Try a simple ducky. Try re-orienting your scanner, as it is very possible that simply moving the scanner to another location will cause some of the offending towers to become less weaker and allow the stronger/strongest to come through thus minimizing distortion to some extent. Some have tried using tin foil to block signals from one direction.

All depends on where you are. If you are in the heart of hte simulcast and are having issues, you might not be able to solve them. If you are way outside of the simulcast so that nearly all of the sites are in the same general direction to you, it'll probably be even more diffiicult.

The easiest thing to try is just re-orient the scanner until you get a decent decode. Of course, what works today may not [and likely will not] work the same tomorrow.

The only solution to the distortion woes is to use something that actually supports decode of simulcast P25.

mike
 

wa8pyr

Technischer Guru
Moderator
Joined
Sep 22, 2002
Messages
4,166
Location
Ohio
#20
Awhile I could easily argue that the system is at end of life, considering some agencies are still using the old FM conventional radio's, that's not what I want to do nor is it my point. Where are these other, smaller, few, agencies going to come up with the $$ to buy new radios and then come up with the $$ to pay for monthly subscription costs?
If the county were entirely rural with a small population and everyone was still using conventional exclusively they could probably get away with staying on conventional; it's fairly simple with readily available equipment.

However, Stark County is a mish-mash of trunked and conventional users, and interoperability has got to be a major headache not to mention a safety issue. A big problem with conventional in an urban or semi-urban setting such as Canton/Stark County is that there just are not enough radio frequencies to go around for the various requirements, making daily operations as well as interoperability a lot more complicated. When you add in the fact that they're now mostly an "island" surrounded by areas using MARCS, switching over makes more sense.

In addition, the old Canton/Stark system is definitely end of life. It's 20+ years old and was designed around technology using parts which are no longer available. A serious hardware failure would cause a major system outage and leave the county in the dark for radio coverage until it's fixed. . . assuming it could be fixed.

Since MARCS is taking over maintenance once the new system is on line, the amount of money the county will save on system maintenance costs (probably around $200,000-300,000 per year) makes the $20/month per radio fee a lot easier to live with.

Your arguments about smaller agencies coming up with the money have been put forth regularly since shared local or regional systems (not just MARCS) came into common use; smaller agencies have always managed to come up with the money, through grants, shared purchasing plans which reduce acquisition costs, more effective budgeting and so on. Some agencies are even given gently used radios which are in good repair and still perfectly functional. They'll figure it out, if they haven't already.
 
Last edited:
Top