dmchalmers
Member
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2019
- Messages
- 434
What helo, Air Ambulance Frequents Escanaba Mi?
hightime
Member
That
That would be Guardian Flight using MPSCS If you program Unit ID 9523500 and set an alert you should catch it if you are in the Escanaba, Iron Mt, Marq areas, and they are flying.
Jasonjones
Newbie
The L3Harris train is coming to town.
Is this a system that would still be monitorable?
Jasonjones
Newbie
Unknown right now, but it is going to be the new 800MHz system to replace the old vhf one.
CrabbyMilton
Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2008
- Messages
- 918
Obviously, we won't like it if it's not monitorable. But the bottom line is will it work as prescribed when someone keys the mic regardless of which radio frequencies are being used.
I didn't find a press release at L3Harris.com nor bid award documents at doa.wi.gov that support this. Do you have a source?
sfd119
Member
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,763
Program Management - Deputy PM, WISCOM Implementation, Madison WI at L3Harris Technologies
Learn more about applying for Program Management - Deputy PM, WISCOM Implementation, Madison WI at L3Harris Technologies
careers.l3harris.com
If its L3, it most likely will be OpenSky. Totally E.
Here is all the doc's including RFP, and E is mentioned a few times
Here is all the doc's including RFP, and E is mentioned a few times
EF Johnson, L3Harris, Motorola, PowerTrunk, Stanley Security and Verizon submitted proposals in response to the State’s project vision, also referred to as the Challenge Statement, to deploy a statewide public-safety grade radio system
DVINTHEHOUSEMAN
Up North
I don't think going statewide 800 is a great idea, especially once you start getting north of Wausau. You're going to need quite a few more sites for reliable coverage than there are with the existing VHF system, since VHF penetrates into the forest better than 800 does, and with the low membership (WSP is really the only full time user of WISCOM on quite a few sites), is it really worth replacing the entire system or is it more effective to add 800 sites where needed and retrofit existing sites with the updated technology. I can understand wanting 800 in cities and stuff like that but in the rest of the state where it's dense forest, hilly terrain, etc. I think keeping the existing VHF system there would be better.
But who knows, it's Wisconsin.
But who knows, it's Wisconsin.
DVINTHEHOUSEMAN
Up North
I absolutely agree that 800 is the way to go- for urban areas. However, outside of those areas, which is pretty much over 85% of the state, you have mother nature and you have the terrain to deal with. Here in Ashland county, I can receive Ashland PD from Mellen and vice versa with the WISCOM site just south of Mellen. Both have decent coverage in those areas and only transmit at 100 watts. If either was 800, I bet you I couldn't receive it from the other location. One VHF WISCOM site covers quite a bit of the county.
Gogebic county is somewhat comparable to the size of Ashland county. They have 5 or 6 MPSCS sites to cover their county. If Ashland county WISCOM goes 800, they're likely going to need at least three towers to cover the whole county with the same level of coverage as the one VHF site in Mellen. One by Ashland, one by Mellen, and one between Glidden and Butternut.
As for the noise floor argument, if you're in the middle of nowhere, noise floor will likely be the least of your concerns. I have no opposition to adding/converting sites to 800 that provide primary coverage for a city, but they really should leave the majority of VHF sites on VHF. They could maybe make a site that covers multiple cities or a denser population area dual band trunked or add an 800 site so you would have that better in-city coverage while still maintaining the rural coverage.
Just a couple of my thoughts on it.
TLDR There's better ways to do it than outright replacing the existing VHF/800 system with an 800 exclusive system.
Gogebic county is somewhat comparable to the size of Ashland county. They have 5 or 6 MPSCS sites to cover their county. If Ashland county WISCOM goes 800, they're likely going to need at least three towers to cover the whole county with the same level of coverage as the one VHF site in Mellen. One by Ashland, one by Mellen, and one between Glidden and Butternut.
As for the noise floor argument, if you're in the middle of nowhere, noise floor will likely be the least of your concerns. I have no opposition to adding/converting sites to 800 that provide primary coverage for a city, but they really should leave the majority of VHF sites on VHF. They could maybe make a site that covers multiple cities or a denser population area dual band trunked or add an 800 site so you would have that better in-city coverage while still maintaining the rural coverage.
Just a couple of my thoughts on it.
TLDR There's better ways to do it than outright replacing the existing VHF/800 system with an 800 exclusive system.
As mentioned in post 1696, this was already discussed along with some great attachments to explain why.
You need to read them. Functional Specs 5.3.1 is a huge reason why VHF is not ideal for this application. (Appendix M and the discussion of BDA's are also part of this).
The engineering and system planning have been done. There's no benefit to continue to hash out VHF vs 800 any more except to send the thread into total disarray.
Program Management - Deputy PM, WISCOM Implementation, Madison WI at L3Harris Technologies
Learn more about applying for Program Management - Deputy PM, WISCOM Implementation, Madison WI at L3Harris Technologies
Thanks for posting this.
whop94
Member
If its L3, it most likely will be OpenSky. Totally E.
Here is all the doc's including RFP, and E is mentioned a few times
Do they even still roll out new OpenSky systems? There is absolutely no way they would go with OpenSky, I would bet anything it’s a P25 phase 2 system, all of our neighboring states and lions share of our most populated counties and cities are running trunked P25 systems, that is essentially the only rational option if the system is indeed supposed to be interoperable. Harris makes P25 systems, I believe DaneCom is a Harris product.
GTO_04
Member
Similar threads
