Thank you!! I've been saying the same thing for years and I work for/with these clowns. Everyone thinks I'm a (insert bad word here) for voicing this too. These agencies are out of control.
Washington, DC - Protest delays FBI’s huge sole-source deal with Motorola
- Thread starter Thunderbolt
- Start date
- Status
Thank you!! I've been saying the same thing for years and I work for/with these clowns. Everyone thinks I'm a (insert bad word here) for voicing this too. These agencies are out of control.
productionguy85
Member
Thats because everybody is a bunch of Hypocrites.
902
Member
I've been involved in all sides of the issue. Competitive procurement is vital to keeping smaller businesses operating in our communities when there is a large, homogeneous system. Anyone who has been in this profession for several decades has seen the local two-way shop go away once a regionalized radio system makes its way into the communities the shop once served, if that shop was independent or sold a competitive brand to the "big" system. Then, only the manufacturer-favored shop survives and all competition in all markets seems to evaporate, except maybe for items that are blister-packed and can be immediately set up and shipped without the need for continued support. What ends up happening is that these "mom and pop two-way shops" close. Large centralized depots will fly out support specialists, and maybe a regional satellite office will supply a "warm body" to fulfill a contractual response time.
Standards-based systems are also vital. That means that there needs to be a lot of representation around the table in the standards-making process so that a dominant player does not sway or bully proprietary embellishments into the standard. For example, there would be minimal compatibility to insure interoperability, and then there would be upper-level performance offered as a high order set of features that precludes any such interoperablity.
This last thing is big in the grants community, particularly in urban areas: the NIFTY FACTOR. I hate to term it this way, but some of the folks making procurement decisions are 60-somethings whose mommys never bought them the Howdy Doody cowboy suit, the big clunky red or blue bicycle with the streamers coming off the handlebars, the X-Ray glasses with the spiral lenses, or that Captain Video set of walkie-talkies they dreamed about in the back of the comic books. They have purchasing authority now, and they certainly can compensate for that lacking childhood - with grant money! I know my analog seems kinda whacked, but... think about it... seriously.
The operative issue needs to be practicality and service within the given environment. Someone cited NXDN as being indefensible. I can somewhat defend that, because a 4 kHz wide system can be shoe-horned into operation in areas where anything wider cannot be accommodated. What I'm getting at is knowing your functional environment and any restrictions that come with it. I suppose the bottom line is knowing what you need to do the job you need to do and specifying the equipment that will allow you to do that. Analyses of needs is something one usually does not see in the industry or the public sector (most like to take something that already exists and seems to work somewhere else, then plagiarize it to their own organization and environment).
Standards-based systems are also vital. That means that there needs to be a lot of representation around the table in the standards-making process so that a dominant player does not sway or bully proprietary embellishments into the standard. For example, there would be minimal compatibility to insure interoperability, and then there would be upper-level performance offered as a high order set of features that precludes any such interoperablity.
This last thing is big in the grants community, particularly in urban areas: the NIFTY FACTOR. I hate to term it this way, but some of the folks making procurement decisions are 60-somethings whose mommys never bought them the Howdy Doody cowboy suit, the big clunky red or blue bicycle with the streamers coming off the handlebars, the X-Ray glasses with the spiral lenses, or that Captain Video set of walkie-talkies they dreamed about in the back of the comic books. They have purchasing authority now, and they certainly can compensate for that lacking childhood - with grant money! I know my analog seems kinda whacked, but... think about it... seriously.
The operative issue needs to be practicality and service within the given environment. Someone cited NXDN as being indefensible. I can somewhat defend that, because a 4 kHz wide system can be shoe-horned into operation in areas where anything wider cannot be accommodated. What I'm getting at is knowing your functional environment and any restrictions that come with it. I suppose the bottom line is knowing what you need to do the job you need to do and specifying the equipment that will allow you to do that. Analyses of needs is something one usually does not see in the industry or the public sector (most like to take something that already exists and seems to work somewhere else, then plagiarize it to their own organization and environment).
I've watched Motorola Techs disconnect receivers at tower sites and later claim as system problem.
I watched a Kenwood techs take a MSR 2000's out of service claiming it is no good, replacing it with a kenwood mobile and a power supply only to find the MSR 2000 at the next hamfest noted as "works great" on the table the kenwood shop had setup.
The MSR 2000 had a unique modification to it that made it stand out. The same station was at the hamfest.
Interesting. Could it be that Kenwood, Harris and EFJ are not total angels that the RR Engineers say they are ? Hrmmm..
Lobbyists and payoffs. It's quite simple.
That sounds like one shady dealer, which any OEM could fall victim to. What the topic listed was about an OEM biasing bids.
That said, the dealer should be called out for the shady practice.
Sent via Tapatalk
MTS2000des
5B2_BEE00 Czar
The problem with this is: 1)-most of the customers do not have enough knowledge on LMR to make informed decisions on their own, and 2)-most industry consultants have ties to the very industry they consult in. Obviously this results in skewed recommendations, skewed towards the vendors that many of said consultants worked for in the past. Some may even get kickbacks.
A true resource would be a board of advisers who are truly independent, and not paid for their services, and are not employed by a vendor, contractor and don't professionally consult in the field.
BirkenVogt
Member
I don't want to stomp all over you, but the MSR2000 is a crystal controlled wideband repeater/base. Could it be that is the reason it was "no good" and removed? Or did you mean an MTR 2000?
This happened before narrowbanding mandate.
Hope the FBI doesn't do business with Harris Corporation!! No offense to you Harris Corp lovers of their lame radio systems, but Motorola over-all does have better interoperability for systems then most other providers. It's a happy medium anyway. FBI contracts motorola for their radios and some other 3rd party for system setup. Our defense ( military) has Harris as their sole supporter for their radios.
Motorola
The start of this thread is interesting....Everybody is missing a point. No matter what the manufacturer using a proprietary format the taxpayers end up getting screwed. WHY? When it comes time to replace the radios/gear the agency MUST purchase the equipment from the original source. There is no room for bidding. This is ANOTHER reason the APCO Project 25 is the answer!!!!!!! Agencies can put the system out to bid and get a better bang for the TAXPAYERS bucks!!!!!!!!!!
The start of this thread is interesting....Everybody is missing a point. No matter what the manufacturer using a proprietary format the taxpayers end up getting screwed. WHY? When it comes time to replace the radios/gear the agency MUST purchase the equipment from the original source. There is no room for bidding. This is ANOTHER reason the APCO Project 25 is the answer!!!!!!! Agencies can put the system out to bid and get a better bang for the TAXPAYERS bucks!!!!!!!!!!
b7spectra
EMS Dispatcher
Come on everyone. It boils down to one thing and one thing only - BRIBERY! He who lines the pockets of the buyer the most, wins the contract. Simple & easy to understand.
iamhere300
Member
Either one of them have the same capability to be just as interoperable as the other. Harris, Motorola, or anyone else. And Harris is no where near the "sole supporter" for the military radio systems.
iamhere300
Member
Not exactly sure what you mean by Kenwood tech, I suppose you meant employees of a Kenwood radio dealer?
Given the limited number of techs employed, and controlled by Kenwood, this must be what you are talking about - Kenwood has no control over what a local shop does for the most part. They might get involved if a customer has a complaint.
Anyways, I was replacing MSR2000's since the late 90's, most of my customers wanted to be proactive and replace them as parts where NLA from Motorola and the aftermarket.
iamhere300
Member
I have a Midland/Icom shop in the central part of my state that has unplugged power to my community repeaters knowing it was a 3 hour drive to plug it back in.
Does that make Midland/Icom bad?
Motorola has little tech force, using local Motorola shops for that kind of stuff.
iamhere300
Member
Great concept. Now where do you find these people that can do all that for free? I guarantee you, it rapidly gets to be a time intensive thing. Add to that, a lot of the people that would really be good at it, like 902, can
t due to their full time job.
People who are active in the agencies who will use it will be great, but they have to have that knowledge of two way. They also need to be the actual users, not the senior management.
Superman anyone?
scannermanner1
Member
why not exactly???
if the military can rely on Harris radios, why can't the Bureau???
scannermanner1
Member
who is it then??
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
