Washington County considers options for new radio system

Status
Not open for further replies.

izz

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Messages
124
Location
Belgium, WI
From this mornings Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Choices range in price, may include a consolidated dispatch center.

Washington County could spend between $8.9 and $19.5 million to replace the aging radio system used by the Sheriff's Department, a county consultant said Thursday.

Costs vary depending on which frequencies, such as VHF or 800 MHz, and digital technologies are used, said Dominick Arcuri, senior vice president with RCC Consultants Inc.

The Woodbridge, NJ - based firm was hired by the county to recommend a new system.

The department currently depends on a VHF system that uses a wide band of frequencies, Sheriff Brian Rahn said. Washington County is planning to replace that system in 2007, a step ahead of federal regulators who have ordered county and municipal emergency radio systems to invest in so-called narrowband technologies by 2013.

Creating a centralized radio dispatch center serving the Sheriff's Department and all municipalities within a new structure would cost $1.21 million in addition to the price tag for equipment, said Kent Ryan, a managing consultant with RCC.

In one standard plan, known as a consolidated dispatch center, dispatchers on duty would answer radio calls from any and all communities.

The Cities of West Bend and Hartford and the Village of Germantown operate dispatch centers for their communities separate from the Sheriff's Department.

If those municipalities agree to join a centralized, countywide dispatch center under the condition that one dispatcher on every shift is dedicated to each of their communities, the additional consoles and other equipment needed would add about $216,000 to the building costs, Ryan said. This type of service is known as a combined dispatch center.

Arcuri and Ryan released the cost estimates Thursday at a meeting of the County Board's Radio Communications Systems Committee. In early January, RCC will submit a preliminary report to the committee and recommend a new radio system, Arcuri said.

The consultant will not recommend whether the county should move to a centralized dispatch center, however.

Hartford Police Chief Tom Jones told radio committee members that the Common Council there would decide whether to invest the money in new technology so that it could continue operating a separate dispatch center.

The Hartford "city council will not stand by and let the County Board decide whether the dispatch center will be taken away," Jones said.

One technology option being considered by RCC is a conventional narrowband VHF radio system that would cost the county between $8.9 million and $9.7 million, Arcuri said. Each municipal police and fire department would be assigned specific channels in a conventional system.

A so-called trunked narrowband VHF system, in which calls can be broadcast on any channels within a shared pool of channels, would cost up to $13.1 million. A big share of the added costs would come from equipment needed to route calls among the channels.

Using an 800 MHz frequencies would be the most costly option, with an estimated price of up to $19.5 million. Signals fade over a shorter distance than VHF, however, and the main reason for the higher costs is the need for additional transmission towers.

VHF systems would require four to six towers, while an 800 MHz system would require 10 to 12 towers to provide the same reliability of service, Arcuri said.
 

RevGary

Pastor and Chaplain Responder
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
806
I feel sorry for any city administrator who gets talked into an 800 system these days.The experience that several western Lake Michigan shoreline and slightly inland communities have had with 800 in most configurations is not at all good. The constant humidity present along the western shoreline from Gary, Indiana, all the way up past Gladstone, Michigan, allows a 'tunnel effect' of extremely long distance RF interferance from other systems using the same frequencies, but "out of range' according to the frequency coordinators. For instance, I have monitored the Green Bay trunked system occasionally and have heard down state control channels wiping out several of the usable local transmitters in the trunk. This is going to get someone killed, because the system can't be relied upon by the beat officers on the street trying to get into the system with 3 watt portables. Their signals are not recognized because of the higher power downstate RF eliminating their transmissions. Their tech's have been working on filtering, but have had little success. I personally have no faith in 800. If a GBPD offcer gets into a chase and gets out of the city limits by just 4 to 5 miles, his radio is useless and has to revert back to the VHF backup on 155.130, or 155.475 liason with the State. This, too is dangerous because of the unfamiliarity most officers have with the VHF radio. It is rarely used and is turned off most of the time. Having to negotiate traffic in a chase and manipulate an unfamiliar radio is also inherently dangerous. City 'politics' bought that 800 system and now they're stuck with it.
 
Last edited:

izz

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Messages
124
Location
Belgium, WI
Doesn't the Green Bay system broadcast from a power plant smoke stack?

I keep a eye on the Ozaukee Co Radio System User committee and the Sheboygan Co Communication Council and have never heard of any skip problems.

I don't understand why Washington Co needs so many towers. Here in Ozaukee Co, 3 towers are used and in Sheboygan Co which is slightly larger than Washington Co, 6 towers are used.
 

RevGary

Pastor and Chaplain Responder
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
806
IZZ - Green Bay has antenna locations at: PD HQ, The power plant on Bylsby Avenue, the water tower just off Mount Mary Drive, the water tower in Ashwaubenon on Ridge Road, a light tower at Packer stadium on Lombardi Ave, and one on top of St. Vincent Hospital as of the last published coordinates that I remember seeing back in early 2004.

You may be lucky in not hearing any interferance in your area due to no Illinois, Ohio or Indiana systems using the same frequencies. Up here, it is a different story. This time of year it isn't quite as bad as in the humid summer weather, but I can hear other control and data transmitters here direct from Marion County, Indiana on 856.2125 and from the Village of Hoffman Estates, Illinois on 857.2125 just to mention a couple (Morse code ID tags). In the summer, GBPD and the other 5 agencies using that trunk are lucky to have 2 clear channels to share without the buzz of control transmitters from south of here wiping them out with RF fields.

Some agencies throughout the midwest have been led to believe that a 'more' towers will give "good relaibility" to the system - just to sell extra equipment which is probably not necessary OR IS NEEDED in certain areas because of the significant signal path problems that 800 transmitters and receivers face with obstructions and the characteristics of 800 being quite finicky. The PD here has so many dead spots in the metro area that some of the officers have to use cellphones to call HQ because the cell coverage is better than their own radio system in some buildings and downtown locations. The fire department has issues with this as well because some of their portables will not hit the trunk from fireground areas and this, too, is unsafe.

As I said earlier, I am NOT a fan of 800 systems in ANY configuration due to the characteristics of the signal limiting of obstructions in an urban setting... I would MUCH rather see 450 to 465 Mhz frequencies used by law enforcement instead of being talked into the super high priced technology involved in 800 equipment (more profit for the manufacturers in 800 than in any other part of the spectrum). It is a shame that Public Safety personnel have to be placed in jeopardy with poor communications just because some city committee got pressured into purchasing an 800 system by high pressue politics and sales persons.
 
Last edited:

GTO_04

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2004
Messages
1,938
Location
Noblesville, IN
RevGary said:
IZZ - Green Bay has antenna locations at: PD HQ, The power plant on Bylsby Avenue, the water tower just off Mount Mary Drive, the water tower in Ashwaubenon on Ridge Road, a light tower at Packer stadium on Lombardi Ave, and one on top of St. Vincent Hospital as of the last published coordinates that I remember seeing back in early 2004.

You may be lucky in not hearing any interferance in your area due to no Illinois, Ohio or Indiana systems using the same frequencies. Up here, it is a different story. This time of year it isn't quite as bad as in the humid summer weather, but I can hear other control and data transmitters here direct from Marion County, Indiana on 856.2125 and from the Village of Hoffman Estates, Illinois on 857.2125 just to mention a couple (Morse code ID tags). In the summer, GBPD and the other 5 agencies using that trunk are lucky to have 2 clear channels to share without the buzz of control transmitters from south of here wiping them out with RF fields.

Some agencies throughout the midwest have been led to believe that a 'more' towers will give "good relaibility" to the system - just to sell extra equipment which is probably not necessary OR IS NEEDED in certain areas because of the significant signal path problems that 800 transmitters and receivers face with obstructions and the characteristics of 800 being quite finicky. The PD here has so many dead spots in the metro area that some of the officers have to use cellphones to call HQ because the cell coverage is better than their own radio system in some buildings and downtown locations. The fire department has issues with this as well because some of their portables will not hit the trunk from fireground areas and this, too, is unsafe.

As I said earlier, I am NOT a fan of 800 systems in ANY configuration due to the characteristics of the signal limiting of obstructions in an urban setting... I would MUCH rather see 450 to 465 Mhz frequencies used by law enforcement instead of being talked into the super high priced technology involved in 800 equipment (more profit for the manufacturers in 800 than in any other part of the spectrum). It is a shame that Public Safety personnel have to be placed in jeopardy with poor communications just because some city committee got pressured into purchasing an 800 system by high pressue politics and sales persons.

Well said! I wish more people would realize the limitations of 800 MHz systems. Greenwood, IN had to go back to their old VHF radio system when the 800 system had too many dead spots. Another tower had to be added before they could go back to the 800 system. This happens with many agencies that use 800 MHz frequencies.

Thanks for posting that article. That is one of the few newspaper articles I have seen that gives a more realistic look at 800 MHz systems. Most news articles make 800 MHz seem like the best thing since sliced bread and that it's a "must have." Motorola has done a great sales job on state and local governments when it comes to 800 MHz radio systems.
If I were a law enforcement officer, I would not want to rely on an 800 MHz radio systems in an emergency. Too many times I hear "you're 10-1."

GTO_04
 
Last edited:

RevGary

Pastor and Chaplain Responder
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
806
GTO 04 - I may be stretching this a bit, but in a 'perfect' world, there would be a local or county 250 watt ERP repeater on a frequency in the 42 to 46 MHZ band for public safety like back in the 50's and 60's. Now THOSE systems didn't have dead spots!! With available technology these days, the low band VHF 'skip' would not be much of an issue any longer. Two stage CTCSS tones would take care of that although having a portable with a 2 foot long 'rubber duckie' might not go over too well... LOL >>>> JUST KIDDING, of course, but you get the idea. 800 and above does NOT do well in urban settings and the systems become so complex that the maintenance on the systems becomes a real concern... OR IS IT PLANNED that way by Motorola and the other majors for megabucks in post installation service and consultation fees ???

A good VHF system or a good UHF system will provide a much better safety factor for those responders who place their lives on the line every day compared to the long list of disadvantages of any 800 system.
 

1268

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 11, 2005
Messages
479
I agree 100%, as a public safety worker and on these forums I've been crucified for talking down 800mhz, I've watched this concept exploded in the southeast and it just is not as good as a vhf high system, As a native badger my big fear would be that alot of these rural Wisconsin counties get sucked into a sales pitch, My home county of Waupaca has had radio problems ,if they went 800 mhz there is no way things would get better. Thanks Rev Gary great job!!
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
0
Location
Virginia
1268 said:
my big fear would be that alot of these rural Wisconsin counties get sucked into a sales pitch.
No rural county in Wisconsin should go to 800Mhz especially in the north woods. With all the trees and the terrain 800 would not work at all. Atleast the state relizes this and they are looking into a 150mhz Trunking system.

Rev I don't agree with 100%. Most of the 800mhz systems that I have listened to have been P25. The P25 systems work and sound a hell of a lot better than analog systems. I hate analog trunking systems you hardly get a clear signal there always is some type of interfernce, but with P25 systems you can here them clear as a bell.
 

RevGary

Pastor and Chaplain Responder
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
806
There aren't many dedicated digital audio systems around here on 800 anywhere so I do not own a monitor for that mode as yet (no need). The APCO 25 systems that are in use (very few) are all on 155-156 MHZ and seem to have problems with equipment failures quite often and have to revert back to analog mode... I have heard Marinette County personnel discussing this in the past. The more bells and whistles that are built into any system, the more likely it is to fail... and with the safety of officers and firefighters on the line, that is a big risk to take.

By the way - It is a bit warmer here this morning than it has been (17 degrees)... so I decided to take a walk in the newly fallen snow. I noticed two men on a snowmobile out on the completely frozen lake nearby. The passenger was facing rearward and was holding a fishing pole. He was dragging about 100 feet of line and a bass spinner bait behind him. I waved at them and they came over to where I was standing on the shoreline. I said good morning and asked them what they were up to... the driver put down his can of Budweiser and said, "Trolling..."
 

1268

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 11, 2005
Messages
479
Have to reply on the P25 Post, as a safety officer on the fireground I have had on 2 occasions had my new state of the art system puke, you want to talk about frustrating try having 2 interior fire crews, one vent team, and various incoming units not be able to talk with each other. Luckly no one was hurt, and we had a VHF high system to fall back on,75% of the time it's great but the rest of the time is where I have problems with these high priced cash cows. There is no system that I know of that is 100%, anybody coming to your county saying that BEWARE.
 

RevGary

Pastor and Chaplain Responder
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
806
Sounds as if the lobyists from the manufacturer are progressing quickly at what they do well - selling electronically uneducated administrators a bill of goods.
 
Last edited:

djeplett

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
857
Location
NE Wisconsin
It would be very interesting to know how many repeaters covered the upper penninsula of Michigan before the state of Michigan bought their digital trunking system. The terrain is somewhat similar there to northern Wisconsin.

From what I see there are 61 repeaters in the U.P. for the MPSCS. That covers 15 counties. That's a little over 4 per county. Doesn't seem too excessive. But I wonder what the coverage is like.
 

RevGary

Pastor and Chaplain Responder
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
806
From personal experience in that area adjacent to the Wisconsin border in Michigan counties of Menominee, Dickinnson and Iron, the keyword here is IRON. The Menominee Range mountains (yeah - they really are 'mountains') contain significant amounts of hematite ore. I have seen what that stuff does to signals in all bands including 800 in the UP. The hilly terrain combined with the iron ore in the ground makes for some really significant dead spots. Their old lowband system on 42.48, 42.58 and 42.68 was able to cut through very well. Their new 800 has dead spots that are not just a couple of feet end to end, but MILES across. This is unfortunate because unreliable comm is inexcusable and officers lives are put in jeopardy every time this occurs.
 

djeplett

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
857
Location
NE Wisconsin
I suppose an ideal system would then consist of two systems in different bands. Because VHF-Lo alone is a problem with all the skip interference. Maybe a fallback VHF-Lo frequency that mobiles can use when their 800 system is bad...

The only problem is more frequencies means more money in /\/\'s pocket. (Or whomever...)
 

RevGary

Pastor and Chaplain Responder
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
806
HARDLY ANYONE (PD) uses VHF low any more, so the 'skip' is non existant. Using TWO STAGE CTCSS PL tones would eliminate ANY that IS present. It's just that the 56 to 64 inch whips are not 'politicallly correct' any longer... LOL .
 

izz

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Messages
124
Location
Belgium, WI
The Washington County Radio Communications Systems Committee will meet on Thursday, March 16 at 9:00 a.m. in the Sheriff's Department Training Room.

RCC Consultants will be recommending a new countywide radio system.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top