What communication system would you assign to your local public safety?

Status
Not open for further replies.

N4DES

Retired 0598 Czar ÆS Ø
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
2,390
Location
South FL
rfradioconsult said:
The FCC refers to it as "slow growth" plan

Sorry but your incorrect....Slow growth is only for the deployment of subscribers and not for the infrastructure. You get one year to build out a system based on your complete license unless you request an extension...

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/16nov20071500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2007/octqtr/47cfr90.631.htm

(f) If a station is not placed in permanent operation, in accordance
with the technical parameters of the station authorization, within one
year, except as provided in Sec. 90.629, its license cancels
automatically. For purposes of this section, a base station is not
considered to be placed in operation unless at least two associated
mobile stations, or one control station and one mobile station, are also
placed in operation.

Now based on 90.629 you can request an "Extended Implementation Period" which allows you 5 years to build out a system if it is very complex and must be granted by the FCC ahead of time and has very limited requirements.

Applicants requesting frequencies for either trunked or conventional
operations may be authorized a period of up to five (5) years for
constructing and placing a system in operation in accordance with the
following:
(a) The applicant must justify an extended implementation period.
The justification must describe the proposed system, state the amount of
time necessary to construct and place the system in operation, identify
the number of base stations to be constructed and placed in operation
during each year of the extended construction period, and show that:
(1) The proposed system will require longer than twelve (12) months
to construct and place in operation because of its purpose, size, or
complexity; or
(2) The proposed system is to be part of a coordinated or integrated
wide-area system which will require more than twelve (12) months to
plan, approve, fund, purchase, construct, and place in operation;

This rule does not take into consideration the future annexation of property, proposed expansions of a system, or additional license grants. It is based on an initially submitted application to the FCC.
 

letarotor

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,051
Location
Arlington, TX
Get it right the 1st time!

Some very good replys here. Encryption, no, only on sensitive comms like SWAT and narcotics channels, too expensive to justify. Our agency just went through the process of purchasing three brand new helicopters with the latest public safety radio systems available. The main thing to keep in mind is that an aquisition process for many cities/counties takes years. Nothing moves quick when you're dealing with a bureauacracy. Therefore, do a very thorough needs assessment. Hire an expert, not some roodie poo consultant or so-called expert who is the Mayor's brother-in-law. Shop around and listen to all the radio company pitches and remember the information they give you will be best case senerios and that they will all promise you the Moon and make everything sound rosey. If a company comes in and says they are developing a new system that will do this, and do that, show them the door. You don't want anything that is unproven or untested. Be skeptical and ask lots of questions. Once you have a good needs assessment and all the bids, state those needs and your justification for one system over another in the RFP or RFB. Also do a future growth assessment and include those requirements and hope the bucks are available and the decision makers go for it. The biggest thing to remember is if you don't get all the bells and whistles you want during the acquisition process, chances are you will never get them. Go over that RFB a hundred times if you have to to make sure everything is right. And follow the process closely to make sure the bean counters in the executive offices don't make unnecessary cuts here and there (like in our case it was air filtration units, heating units and cuts in training). Make sure you get it right the first time, or you will be stuck with what you get for a long, long, long time.

Mark
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2004
Messages
1,217
Location
Tulsa
Now that you went to all the trouble of cut and paste; I said consideration of growth in coverage. What I'm referring to is were do you place your base stations, in a central location or in a inner core and outer core plan. Granted slow growth refers to channel loading; but all factors need to be taken in consideration.
 

letarotor

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,051
Location
Arlington, TX
I also forgot to mention that when your awarded company starts to deliver or build out your new system, you need someone with some balls in your organization that will call them to task when they start cutting corners or not delivering what they promise. Even the best of companies will cut corners, then try to smooze the customer over with BS if someone doesn't have the cajones to call them on it. Unfortunately, most administrators/managers (who really don't know the specs anyway) but do have the power, don't want to undertake the unpleasant task of confronting them. Unfortunately, the troops (the folks who actually use the equipment or system on a daily basis) are stuck and have to live with the problems that eventually pop up.

Mark
 

N4DES

Retired 0598 Czar ÆS Ø
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
2,390
Location
South FL
rfradioconsult said:
Now that you went to all the trouble of cut and paste; I said consideration of growth in coverage. What I'm referring to is were do you place your base stations, in a central location or in a inner core and outer core plan. Granted slow growth refers to channel loading; but all factors need to be taken in consideration.

The FCC has no definition of "coverage growth" in Part 90. It is soley based on the applicants current coverage requirement and no more. THe NPSPAC rules are a classic example of this with the 40 dBu contour typicially no more than 3 miles of the agencies jursdictional boundaries. NPSPAC rules give no authority for a "what if" situation should a municipality do a future annexation of unincorporated areas. They have to annex it first and ask for the addional coverage after.
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2004
Messages
1,217
Location
Tulsa
During this "exchange" I have addressed planning; I have never mentioned filing an application. In radio as in other things in life we don't plan to fail; but we fail to plan.
 

CanesFan95

Active Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2008
Messages
3,014
Location
FL
UHF Conventional Analog.

mciupa said:
For Public Safety ?

Definitely an encrypted system.

Hello! Are you not a radio hobbyist?? :roll:

If it was me, I would go with analog conventional UHF repeaters. Why? Better coverage, less RFI than VHF, easier interoperability, lower cost, more reliability, a wider selection of equipment, and increased vendor competition for my dollar.
 

SAR923

Active Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,514
I wouldn't care what system was chosen as long as I can talk to neighboring jurisdictions and, if the poop really hit the fan, we can cross talk on scanners. I live in an area where all the agencies are on 154-159 MHz except for one county that's on EDACS ProVoice. During a recent tornado, they weren't able to talk to us, we couldn't talk to them, and we couldn't monitor them. The real issue should be interoperability for an entire region. Instead, consultants and radio manufacturers are selling a bill of goods to each jurisdiction and no one is responsible for overall coordination to insure we can all talk to each other.
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
0
Location
Virginia
Radio Systems

RedPenguin said:
If you were your local public safety communication director, how would you set them up?

So many claim comm dirs cannot set up the radios up correctly or don't know enough about radio comm to set one up.

If there are any of those people here, how do you feel you or they could do better?

Myself, I would actually set up two systems:

A voice system, just a 5 or 10 channel trunking, it can be analog or digitaL, either way. My voice system would include simplex frequencies for fireground, and other "at the scene" commnications.

And I would have a separate data system, that the LEIN, the video recorder, printers in the fire trucks (building prints in the hands of the first responders half way to the scene), fingerprint readers, optical license plate readers, etc, would all reside on my seperate data system, whether it's a MotoMesh, or whatever.
 

kb2vxa

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
6,100
Location
Point Pleasant Beach, N.J.
Just playing a little game of catch up here;

"Unless your located on an island you need to consider interoperability issues. Cost is normally the driving factor, but grant funds may offset some of the costs if you participate in a state communications plan."

Actually I do live on an island but that way beside the point. We had interop when the county and state trunked systems went into operation years ago but when a state repeater system specifically for interop went up at the municipal building the FD and PD both got new systems with the PD going encrypted. Yeah, that's where the "surplus funds" came from and so far the state system has never been used but for the money grab.

"Encryption? Why would you want that when it can't be monitorable??!!"

Well duh, that's the whole idea behind encryption now isn't it?

"That statement alone adds thousands of dollars to almost each radio, let alone the entire system."

So what? When money comes down from the fed and the state matches the grant what do they care as long as the municipality isn't paying for it?

"Those departments that have gone to a total encrypted system have
things to hide."

No more than any other, only it saves the trouble of "looking over their shoulder" so now they talk openly without switching to "the secret channel" or cell phone.

"Not only that, but it prevents the news media and the public to keep
tabs on what is going on."

Right, there's no spin like spin on a press release. There's a downside directly related to public safety however, local interoperability is lost. Take the city of Asbury Park for example. When the police, fire and EMS could talk on each other's channels they had full interop but when the PD went encrypted it was lost and response time rose sharply. Now messages must be relayed through three dispatchers and you all know how the game of Chinese Telephone works.

"Those departments that have placed encryption into some of their radios and on some channels bear much better in the publics eye."

HUH? There's none so blind as the public eye! That is assuming you meant fare rather than bear which makes no sense.

"Those department heads that jump up and down demanding to have an encrypted radio system don't seem to stay an appointed department head very long after the public starts an outcry."

WHAT outcry? Does the word "clueless" mean anything to you? The public is not invited to closed council meetings and neither the agenda nor the minutes are published. The public neither knows nor cares about police radio, all that matters is they catch the bad guys.

"It serves no real purpose but costing lots of extra money and will shorten your stay in office."

Baloney. The public is willing to write a blank check as long as they feel "protected" be it by the cops, the DHS, NSA, the Patriot Act or "making the world safe for democracy".

Now wake up to the reality of American politics. For as long as I can remember (and that's a pretty long time) cops have had their "secret channels" and have held the monitoring public in low regard for fear of bad guys with radios. I refer you to He Walked By Night, a 1949 movie about a criminal monitoring the LAPD. Fast forward to the FCC mandate that all transmissions of a sensitive nature (cops consider them ALL sensitive) be encrypted and police paranoia stakes a claim, all that's missing is the gold. Fast forward another 20 years and creation of the DHS and federal funding of interoperable and encrypted radio systems, thar's GOLD in them thar hills! With state DHS matching funds building such systems is a breeze so now we have encrypted systems popping up like mushrooms but it's a two edged sword. It satisfies the cops' "need for security" while increasing public suspicion and mistrust so the cops seeing the public as bad guys has led directly to the public seeing the cops as bad guys with the government aiding and abetting it all. So do I have to tell you who the REAL bad guys are? I'm sure you've guessed, you've known them all along.

Er, make that a FIVE edged sword, a false sense of security, loss of interoperability, increased response time, increased public suspicion and mistrust and all at increased cost. Kull The Conqueror would be proud of THIS armorer!

Now before you accuse me of paying too much attention to Rush Limbaugh or having my tin foil hat on too tight let me tell you all you need are copies of the Congressional Register and that of your state to see who is funding what and why. If you have enough working brain cells you can network you can still add 2 and 2 and come up with 4. Oh while you're at it take a closer look at what else is stinking at the bottom of the pork barrel, you'd be outraged at how your money is being wasted.

"...if the poop really hit the fan, we can cross talk on scanners."

I plugged a mic into mine once, it didn't work.
 
Last edited:

mtindor

OH/WV DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
10,394
Location
Carroll Co OH / EN90LN
I live in a county of about 70,000 people in 411 sq miles. As is the case with many/most counties, there isn't enough money to go around. The county operates a 800 mhz analog TRS. Although the coverage could/should be improved in a few areas, I think it does the job. I wouldn't recommend them change to anything else, especially since moving to P25 would cause them to incur major costs that really are better spent on things like funding the county jail and SO. Of course I'm not sure how the system was funded - it may not have been much of a burden on the county with grants and whatnot.

Sure, encryption is great - but not everybody needs encryption, and in the case of those who need encryption they seem to know how to use a telephone when they need to.

The system has a patch to two adjacent counties and the OSP. It wouldn't surprise me if in the next year or so they have more interop patches available for one or more additional counties.

Personally I think whomever did the planning on our system did their homework fairly well. Radios are being replaced thanks to Nextel / rebanding. The sites are nearly perfect site locations. The 911 center seems to be quite efficient. No complaints here, from a taxpayer in our county.

Mike

PS: Our system is close to 10 years old. I'm sure that public safety folks could/would make use of the extended features of the latest technology. But if it does not come to fruition any time in the near future, they'll get by just fine.
 
Last edited:

SAR923

Active Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,514
kb2vxa said:
"...if the poop really hit the fan, we can cross talk on scanners."

I plugged a mic into mine once, it didn't work.

I'm assuming this is just one of your usual sarcastic comments and you really aren't as dumb as you sound. As I'm sure you know, if I'm broadcasting on one frequency and another department is broadcasting on a different frequency, we can crosstalk by listening to our scanners as long as both broadcasts are monitorable by scanner. We don't need common frequencies in this case as long as we can listen to each other. It has been done this way since the first Regency Monitoradios first came out and it worked just fine with very little extra expense. The more "interoperability" we build into systems nowadays, it seems like the fewer frequencies we have in common unless we all use the same type of system, which isn't happening around here.
 

kb2vxa

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
6,100
Location
Point Pleasant Beach, N.J.
Yes Jim it was an acerbic remark but read between the lines. Scanners in the radio room and patrol cars are rather few and far between, for one thing they're a major distraction and these days especially sitting in the front seat of a patrol car is an adventure in claustrophobia. The days of the crystal controlled Cylons (;->) are long gone, you know the systems in use and the cost of a scanner to receive them. Then there's encryption, now what do you do?

Then there a legal question, I know for a fact FCC Part 97 (Amateur Radio) prohibits one way transmissions. If there is such a rule for other services I don't know but I really wouldn't dive in without testing the water with a good communications attorney.

Well, I remember when there was a CB in nearly every police radio room monitoring channel 9 but they went the way of the Regency scanners. Now they send the rookie out for donuts and watch COPS training films on TV when they have nothing better to do. "Not reality, actuality." Like maybe they think I'm sleeping at this hour of the night? (;->)
 

Astro25

Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2007
Messages
396
Location
Chicagoland
Me?

VHF analog repeater... mabey a few RX sites, if it needed it. Nothing wrong with that. Add a DES simplex if you really needed it for ops....
 

SAR923

Active Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,514
Warren,
It's you that's not understanding reality. Your view from the right coast is warped concerning what happens in the rest of the country. Scanners are still common in both dispatch stations and patrol cars in large parts of the country. Even digital trunked systems can be received by scanners that cost less than $500 and many areas (the majority, I suspect) don't use digital. That means a $200 scanner will still work just fine.

Encryption is not an issue. That can be turned off if there's a situation that demands communications in the clear. I'm more concerned about one county being on 800 MHz EDACS ProVoice and all the other surrounding counties being on conventional VHF. There's no way to turn off ProVoice and make it monitorable on a trunked scanner.

As far as one-way broadcasts, those have been done since the first time we got radios. Back in the days, we'd get multiple calls from dispatch per shift with vehicle plates to add to the hot sheet. No one ever responded, it was a true one way broadcast. BOL's of all types are also typical one-way broadcasts. In the event of an emergency, all bets are off when it comes to FCC rules and public safety. If you can show me even one case where disciplinary action has been taken against a public safety agency for cross-talking through scanners, I'll donate $100 to your favorite charity.

As far as your "acerbic remark", that seems to be your specialty. It was a deliberate response to make me sound like a moron and I don't appreciate it. I have been using radios in life and death situations for 30 years. I generally have some idea what I'm talking about.
 

Zaratsu

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
359
Location
Eastern Connecticut
I would change nothing.

Easy to listen analog 460.xxx mhz stuff on two distinct channels. Scrambling possible on Ch2 when needed. Transmitter located at PD HQ in central part of town.

Town of 54K+ people that has three major interstates passing through it, a major retail center, and a metro area population of 1.4M. There is plenty of action, and when at work I monitor these two stations exclusivly so I am not distracted following 5+ departments at once. They do a good job with these tow freqs and I hope that they never change. Monitoring has kept me safe by staying in the house or avoiding an area more than once. As per law, I keep what I hear to myself. If you want to hear what I hear, buy a cheapo scanner.
 

ibagli

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2006
Messages
983
Location
Ohio
SAR2401 said:
Scanners are still common in both dispatch stations and patrol cars in large parts of the country.

And for volunteer FD's, where most members would have one (at least in my experiences).
 

mjthomas59

Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2006
Messages
510
What i'd like to know is who got this whole "interoperability" thing started. Are people stupid(yes, i know that they are).

In Missouri we have a combination of VHF-HI analog and digital, 800mhz conventional, 800mhz trunking, 700mhz trunking, a dab of UHF, and the highway patrol is still on 40mhz lowband.

And amazingly enough, even with all that crap, we still have interop. There is a statewide point to point system on VHF-Hi that all dispatch centers have access to. We have sheriff's net on VHF-Hi which can be used mobile to mobile, and we have the nationwide mutual aid channel which can be accessed by both fixed and mobile radios.

All dispatch centers at the very least can communicate with each other, and the highway patrol is equipped with VHF-HI radios in their cars along with the lowband units. The fire/ems units are able to interop amongst the different counties in the saint louis area.

So after all this crap about interop, we had it 40 years ago, and the only thing this whole "DHS interop" nonsense has done is reduce interop because the small and/or poor counties aren't going to upgrade, and most of the big/rich counties are happy with what they have.

The state and federal gov't just need to foot the bill to get everyone on the same page. I'm sure motorola and macom and all the others will get fat pockets over the deal, but for god sake if you're going to upgrade the system, you need to make sure its going to work, and work as good if not better than what you had.

I'd also add that i agree with everyone else on this thread in that these small towns and rural counties don't need to get onto expensive trunking networks, it isn't cost effective, and is more complicated(thus more probable for errors and problems) than a simple 1 or 2 channel radio system. There is a local town that has 110 officers, divided up to rotate on 10 hour shifts, and they use 2 channels, one primary and one for backup.
 

kb2vxa

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
6,100
Location
Point Pleasant Beach, N.J.
Look Jim, I'm not about wasting time arguing with a brick, not even one with 30 years experience being a brick. As for my sarcasm not directed at anyone in particular; if you wish to play the victim crying boo hoo hoo poor little me it's alright, here's a towel from the Alpha Hotel.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top