• To anyone looking to acquire commercial radio programming software:

    Please do not make requests for copies of radio programming software which is sold (or was sold) by the manufacturer for any monetary value. All requests will be deleted and a forum infraction issued. Making a request such as this is attempting to engage in software piracy and this forum cannot be involved or associated with this activity. The same goes for any private transaction via Private Message. Even if you attempt to engage in this activity in PM's we will still enforce the forum rules. Your PM's are not private and the administration has the right to read them if there's a hint to criminal activity.

    If you are having trouble legally obtaining software please state so. We do not want any hurt feelings when your vague post is mistaken for a free request. It is YOUR responsibility to properly word your request.

    To obtain Motorola software see the Sticky in the Motorola forum.

    The various other vendors often permit their dealers to sell the software online (i.e., Kenwood). Please use Google or some other search engine to find a dealer that sells the software. Typically each series or individual radio requires its own software package. Often the Kenwood software is less than $100 so don't be a cheapskate; just purchase it.

    For M/A Com/Harris/GE, etc: there are two software packages that program all current and past radios. One package is for conventional programming and the other for trunked programming. The trunked package is in upwards of $2,500. The conventional package is more reasonable though is still several hundred dollars. The benefit is you do not need multiple versions for each radio (unlike Motorola).

    This is a large and very visible forum. We cannot jeopardize the ability to provide the RadioReference services by allowing this activity to occur. Please respect this.

Unication issues in Michigan....

Status
Not open for further replies.

Forts

Mentor
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
5,902
Location
Ontario, Canada
From the way the story reads it sounds like coverage issues along with a little reluctance to embrace the new system.
 

Forts

Mentor
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
5,902
Location
Ontario, Canada
Same... We used 154.370 here in southern Ontario for county paging for years and ended up changing due to interference from St Clair County.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Dec 16, 2015
Messages
366
Department paid $250 for each Unication G4 or G5 pager that isn't working properly due to "Coverage" area of the system. "Coverage" area sounds fishy as there should be an antenna on the firehouse.
 

troymail

Silent Key
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
9,982
Location
Supply (Lockwood Inlet area), NC
From the way the story reads it sounds like coverage issues along with a little reluctance to embrace the new system.
That's what I'm reading as well.

"Burtchville Township stated they knew they were going to have coverage issues because they have coverage issues with their radios as well," he said.

He said the new pagers are functioning as well as the old ones did in Burtchville Township.​

If the radios don't work well/right, the pagers won't either.

They're also using Active911 which is pretty popular in my area because it not only sends you pages, it maps the call as well (or at least has that and other capabilities). I'm betting people prefer that over a simple voice or text message.

Poor coverage and a lack of willingness to change - nothing new.
 

IAmSixNine

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,962
Location
Dallas, TX
Poorly designed or implemented system will cause the pager to perform poorly.
Is it an 800 conventional or trunking? is it analog or digital?
 

Forts

Mentor
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
5,902
Location
Ontario, Canada
They are on the MPSCS statewide system (Astro25, Phase 1). The site they are on (St Clair County) is a very large simulcast site. At one point it was the largest statewide system in the US... not sure if that's still the case though.

http://www.michigan.gov/mpscs/
 

IAmSixNine

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,962
Location
Dallas, TX
Yeah the article isnt very detailed. It references the countys new 800mhz fire paging system. So was not sure if they had something on the michigan system or if there was something else added to compliment it or just for the county to use.

EDIT: Man i wish i was closer. I love to solve problems like this. :)
 

W2GLD

Senior Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 20, 2003
Messages
562
Location
Pinckney, Michigan U.S.A.
Well I can tell you that overall feedback is not good here in the Washtenaw County area either. I just spoke with some guys over the weekend and heard numerous complaints about some of the same issues. In addition, I'm testing one of these pages as well, the G5 and while 800 MHz reception is a bit of an issue, the more concerning part is the false activations we're seeing on VHF and the RF noise the amplified charger generates. We've been told it's not a problem, yet it continues to occur. If the pager is in the amplified charger, reception is greatly diminished; proven time and time again with NOAA weather station reception as well. Also seems to be affecting 800 MHz reception when in the charger as well; remove it from the charger and it's great, but it still false activates on the wrong tones on VHF. The channel setup we have is using CTCSS decoding and Motorola Code Plan; can provide the details if anyone else wants to test it and see as well. I can even provide a video of the charger issue; we sent that in to the dealer and got no where with it, so now we sit and wait for a firmware update that hopefully will address the issues. But coupled with this and the added cost now for the Project-25 Phase 2 option; we might just stick with Motorola Monitor VI pagers and simulcast our 800 MHz on a VHF frequency. What's the deal with firmware releases Unication? There's been nothing in months, do you mean to tell us there are no fixes available and that development has ceased, except for P25 Phase 2?
 

IAmSixNine

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,962
Location
Dallas, TX
I believe someone else a while back mentioned problems with their base charger as well.
I recently found out that my wireless qi charger for my android phone creates a bubble about 2 feet in diameter that absolutely kills any VHF signal. Tested with amateur repeater, NOAA and sheriff dept RX on several radios and scanners.
So its possible its a hardware issue in the base charger its self that firmware update to the pager might not fix.
 

owenbricker

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Messages
94
Location
Mansfield Ohio
What does not make sense is the G5 is not being used as a true pager, just a TG being keyed up to set the pager off. It is all the eggs in one basket, I would keep paging on conventional VHF/UHF in case of site failure or other unforeseen problems with the trunk system that you could not page out.
 
Joined
Dec 16, 2015
Messages
366
Well I can tell you that overall feedback is not good here in the Washtenaw County area either. I just spoke with some guys over the weekend and heard numerous complaints about some of the same issues. In addition, I'm testing one of these pages as well, the G5 and while 800 MHz reception is a bit of an issue, the more concerning part is the false activations we're seeing on VHF and the RF noise the amplified charger generates. We've been told it's not a problem, yet it continues to occur. If the pager is in the amplified charger, reception is greatly diminished; proven time and time again with NOAA weather station reception as well. Also seems to be affecting 800 MHz reception when in the charger as well; remove it from the charger and it's great, but it still false activates on the wrong tones on VHF. The channel setup we have is using CTCSS decoding and Motorola Code Plan; can provide the details if anyone else wants to test it and see as well. I can even provide a video of the charger issue; we sent that in to the dealer and got no where with it, so now we sit and wait for a firmware update that hopefully will address the issues. But coupled with this and the added cost now for the Project-25 Phase 2 option; we might just stick with Motorola Monitor VI pagers and simulcast our 800 MHz on a VHF frequency. What's the deal with firmware releases Unication? There's been nothing in months, do you mean to tell us there are no fixes available and that development has ceased, except for P25 Phase 2?
Now that real reports from Agencies are starting to surface, instead of Unication "Fanboys", that are drinking the G4/G5 Kool aid. Agencies and others in the biz, are starting to see that these units are not ready for Prime Time.

I finally feel vindicated that my earlier posts on Unication and it's business practices regarding the G4 and G5 series are coming full circle.

These pagers at this point belong in the amateur community. They are still in beta testing. Firmware is still in beta. Problems with it over heating, programming, design issues, and its lack of reception should be a real concern with groups / departments that NEED these things to save either life or property.

Like I've stated in the past, I would like for these things work. I would like to test and review these units. To be honest, I'm not going to pay out of my pocket $500 for a loaner G5. To get a used one, I'll pass!
 

ffexpCP

wizard of odd
Database Admin
Joined
May 15, 2004
Messages
621
Location
Michigan
I'll let this picture do the talking. That's the MPSCS tower in the background to the right. Pager randomly looses signal. VHF is not as sensitive as a Minitor v.
 

Attachments

KevinC

Moderator
Super Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2001
Messages
5,882
Location
Somewhere other than home :(
I'll let this picture do the talking. That's the MPSCS tower in the background to the right. Pager randomly looses signal. VHF is not as sensitive as a Minitor v.
Disregard...stupid question on my part.

Rephrasing my question...

Are you sure that specific tower/site is in the site list of the radio?
 
Last edited:

ffexpCP

wizard of odd
Database Admin
Joined
May 15, 2004
Messages
621
Location
Michigan
Yes. It is the only site in that zone. When it works, I don't even need the antenna to receive it.
 

ffexpCP

wizard of odd
Database Admin
Joined
May 15, 2004
Messages
621
Location
Michigan
And allow me to clarify. The VHF reference is not related to the picture. In the picture it is 'listening' (or attempting) to the 800mhz p25 tower seen behind it. This is not a simulcast site like the ones referenced in earlier posts.
 

KM4WLV

Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Messages
1,050
Location
Rockwell (Rowan County), NC
I think there are some valid concerns in the article, and with any technology there's always room for improvement. There is one statement in the article I just have trouble understanding and maybe I'm missing something but I've been in public safety for getting close to 23 years now and I'm struggling to understand:

"The pagers are bulky and not designed for everyday use, according to the letter, and many firefighters are not carrying them at times because they are concerned about losing or damaging them."

Yes they're bulky, much more than the Minitor 5 & 6. I've got a G1 and I'm still adjusting to the size lol. But the part of them not carrying them at times because they are concerned about losing or damaging them? That just doesn't make sense to me. When we go to a structure fire we don't leave the TIC in the truck because we're concerned about losing or damaging it, our turnout gear doesn't get left in the locker because we worry about getting damaged, we don't leave those $7,000 Motorola APX radios in the truck or at home because we're worried about losing or damaging them. With the premise of the article being about the operation, or lack thereof, that would seem to me why the guys wouldn't want to carry them. Saying being concerned about losing or damaging them is just an excuse to add to the list because they don't like them. Maybe I'm wrong or missing something but that just stood out to me............ And I don't see how the station alerting system still being offline falls back on the G5 issues unless they were trying to rely on the amplified charger to activate and trip the relays. The rest of the points made I can agree with 100%. In this field, especially when it comes to notification of calls, missing a page could literally mean the difference between life and death.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top