Worcester County

[troymail]

We'll have to wait and see more details of the issues and FE's report on recommendations in the coming months.

I have no knowledge on VRS use on the shore but depending upon the details of the poor coverage/interference issues, I don't see VRS solving it since, in using VRS, the mobile radio is turned into a local repeater for on site portables. Comms between that mobile and the towers still need to work.

Obviously, there is a significant difference in using a portable vs. a mobile radio. If at least some of the issues are while using the mobile radios, I'm thinking VRS won't help. Then again, I am not the expert and they aren't paying me $77k to figure it out....

 

[emtLarmy15]

No. And for what it’s worth: south of Newark there are virtually zero coverage issues... The system also far out performs the EDACS system that we left. There’s a lot of bashing this system is getting. As an everyday user of the system I am happy with it. A lot of mountains have been made of mole hills and because of this there’s a lot of posturing on both sides that I hope can be set aside.

 

[maus92]

We'll have to wait and see more details of the issues and FE's report on recommendations in the coming months.

I have no knowledge on VRS use on the shore but depending upon the details of the poor coverage/interference issues, I don't see VRS solving it since, in using VRS, the mobile radio is turned into a local repeater for on site portables. Comms between that mobile and the towers still need to work.

Obviously, there is a significant difference in using a portable vs. a mobile radio. If at least some of the issues are while using the mobile radios, I'm thinking VRS won't help. Then again, I am not the expert and they aren't paying me $77k to figure it out....

VRS would help in the situations where building materials have changed, and made some buildings less RF transparent. This was specifically mentioned as some assumptions were made before LEED and other energy saving technologies were incorporated in local construction projects.

 

[troymail]

A lot of mountains have been made of mole hills and because of this there’s a lot of posturing on both sides that I hope can be set aside.

This is pretty typical in these situations. The ones most vocal are usually the small numbers that are most directly affected - either day-to-day or based on a past event that they themselves do not want to find themselves in (Google search for some of the horror stories).

You just have to look past your own situation and put yourself in their shoes....

People hate going to digital after only using analog for their entire life. And, as has been cited in some of the reports (Worcester and others), for digital you either have communications or you don't (unlike analog which mostly just becomes seriously scratchy but you can still make out words). Typically, this all comes down to a willingness to pay for the needed system components - and many jurisdictions don't like the price tag to make that a reality (as a taxpayer, they should question anything where our money is involved). Unfortunately, Worcester (as with many other jurisdictions) waited too long to get an independent review of what is needed. And why, if knowing there was already interference issues, did they seem to ignore that until now is a complete mystery....

 

[maus92]

No. And for what it’s worth: south of Newark there are virtually zero coverage issues... The system also far out performs the EDACS system that we left. There’s a lot of bashing this system is getting. As an everyday user of the system I am happy with it. A lot of mountains have been made of mole hills and because of this there’s a lot of posturing on both sides that I hope can be set aside.

Seems the coverage issues are around Newark and in north County areas / Ocean Pines. Of course, the OPVFD testimony reminds me of similar complaints (forecasts really) made by the AACo career firefighters when P25 digital voice was proposed by the county, which led to the fire side retaining analog voice. P25 digital seems to work fine for Montgomery County, which has a similar system as AACo.

Edit: Concur with Troy's assessment above.

 

[troymail]

VRS would help in the situations where building materials have changed, and made some buildings less RF transparent. This was specifically mentioned as some assumptions were made before LEED and other energy saving technologies were incorporated in local construction projects.

True - that might be one where VRS could help... On the other hand, they were saying they were standing in the windows looking at the Central site tower. Interesting, I recall a similar situation with that same tower when I was down in Snow Hill last spring - I could see the tower - even drove to it - but receiving the system was difficult for reasons I still don't understand. In any event, I believe the standard solution is to install in-building repeaters when it is known in advance that those facilities present a coverage issue. On the other hand, one of the "more than expected" attenuation reports was for a fairly new Dollar General store... you can't put repeaters in every building...

Also, from my experience, setting up VRS (even in Anne Arundel County) is a manual process that presents it's own challenges to first responders already busy with the issues they confront.

 

[maus92]

True - that might be one where VRS could help... On the other hand, they were saying they were standing in the windows looking at the Central site tower. Interesting, I recall a similar situation with that same tower when I was down in Snow Hill last spring - I could see the tower - even drove to it - but receiving the system was difficult for reasons I still don't understand. In any event, I believe the standard solution is to install in-building repeaters when it is known in advance that those facilities present a coverage issue. On the other hand, one of the "more than expected" attenuation reports was for a fairly new Dollar General store... you can't put repeaters in every building...

Also, from my experience, setting up VRS (even in Anne Arundel County) is a manual process that presents it's own challenges to first responders already busy with the issues they confront.

Building codes are being adopted (certainly in Montgomery County) that require leaky cable / BRS / BDA in buildings over a certain height / occupancy. I think it is in the "hundreds" of affected structures in Montgomery... The same may be happening in Anne Arundel.

As far as Snow Hill, maybe you were experiencing some co-channel effects. But then again, it could be an antenna alignment and just some very specific location weirdness.

VRS activation *should* be as simple as flipping a switch on the apparatus - not sure what the issues you experienced. Not a big deal in MC - I think they have / are in the process of switching to DVRS.

 

[troymail]

Seems the coverage issues are around Newark and in north County areas / Ocean Pines. Of course, the OPVFD testimony reminds me of similar complaints (forecasts really) made by the AACo career firefighters when P25 digital voice was proposed by the county, which led to the fire side retaining analog voice. P25 digital seems to work fine for Montgomery County, which has a similar system as AACo.

Edit: Concur with Troy's assessment above.

We see that AA is in the processing of establishing additional towers in various areas due to poor coverage for even the existing system.

While in a hotel at BWI airport a few weeks again (NE corner of the county), I noticed some of the weakest coverage I've seen on that system.

Another new tower is in Upper Marlboro - which, unless something has changed recently - Anne Arundel currently has to use the PG system and towers to get coverage in the Sands Rd area. I think AA police have their coverage through the PG system full time (not certain of that) and fire usually had to ask Fire Alarm to "activate the PG patch" (or something to that affect) for responses in that area.

I'm still scratching my head of the significant differences between the Worcester County "5 tower" system and other counties along the bay like Calvert and St. Mary's which have 13+ towers each.... I know Worcester doesn't have the same density of construction as at least St. Mary's but Worcester is still larger in terms of square miles... and compounded by the known interference issues.

VRS activation *should* be as simple as flipping a switch on the apparatus - not sure what the issues you experienced. Not a big deal in MC - I think they have / are in the process of switching to DVRS.

Yup - it should be - and maybe the newer DVRS is better than the original system that was in place. I just recall lots of issues in the past - responders not using it either due to lack of understanding/training, not trusting it, potentially for some users ending up on the wrong channel, etc. I think the system(s) have improved to some degree and there has/have been more training and procedures may even be in place to activate VRS during the response rather than once on scene.

 

[emtLarmy15]

If you believe the propaganda out on VRS it has the ability to be near seamless. Anything can activate it such as the air brake on a fire apparatus.

Radios in theory can be programmed to look for VRS when system coverage is less. I don’t disagree with the thought of them and I believe there has at least been some discussion of getting a demo VRS to see if it could solve issues.

Some of the issues that keep getting brought up were actually solved months ago but keep getting brought up for some reason (ie. having to talk directly into a microphone).

 

[maus92]

If you believe the propaganda out on VRS it has the ability to be near seamless. Anything can activate it such as the air brake on a fire apparatus.

Radios in theory can be programmed to look for VRS when system coverage is less. I don’t disagree with the thought of them and I believe there has at least been some discussion of getting a demo VRS to see if it could solve issues.

Some of the issues that keep getting brought up were actually solved months ago but keep getting brought up for some reason (ie. having to talk directly into a microphone).

If an air brake can activate a VRS, then that is an indication of a bad installation (I'm not sure exactly how that would occur, but dealing with avionics, nothing surprises me.)

VRS is simply a subsystem designed to support portable subscriber units in challenging coverage scenarios, I don't see the "propaganda" angle.

The OPVFD for some reason doesn't like the subscriber equipment chosen for them. Perhaps the county can come up with a funding scheme to get them what they want.

As for overall propaganda / controversy and apparent user dissatisfaction in some departments, I'm positive that the FE consulting process will bring some sanity back to the process - or at least actionable data.

 

[Dispatcher308]

If an air brake can activate a VRS, then that is an indication of a bad installation (I'm not sure exactly how that would occur, but dealing with avionics, nothing surprises me.)

I think he was meaning that you can connect the VRS to activate on deployment of a parking brake, or by putting the vehicle in park or by flipping a switch or pushing a button on the radio. That is the way I read it

 

[emtLarmy15]

Yes. Activating the VRS using park brake signal on fire truck

 

[maus92]

Ah, OK - I read it differently, particularly with the mention / use of “propaganda” preceeding. I apologize. Still I’d rather see a positive activation with visual, aural or other confirmation rather than automatic activation based on a mechanical system.

 

[troymail]

I believe there are different types of VRS - range extenders vs. true vehicle repeaters. For example, in the case of a single unit (i.e. a police officer's portable) might be activated and repeated through his mobile radio... but in other cases, for VRS, you only want a single unit at a scene (i.e. fireground) acting as the local repeater - you don't want every unit at that scene doing it.

In Anne Arundel (still on a legacy Moto system and not P25), I think a fire unit is still required to coordinate a VRS channel with Fire Alarm (and perhaps FA has to do something to activate it) but I am no longer sure how the current VRS works. From listening a while back, I think I still heard users trying to experiment and figure it out...

Still, having said all that - with a properly built and brand new simulcast system - particularly one that was contracted to provide in-building coverage - use of a VRS should be nearly non-existent. There shouldn't be deadspots (although contracts seem to be written at 95% coverage 95% of the time or something to that affect).

Assuming facilities like hospitals, schools, and other buildings were also tested in advance were outfitted with in-building repeaters if needed). Even if those building repeaters were not installed, you'd think there would (should) be a clear documentation of where a vehicle repeater would expect to be employed on an emergency response (vs. finding out by trial and error).

And of course, I think for fireground operations/interior firefighting, NFPA is still recommending the use of direct, non-repeater frequencies.

You really have to trust your system....

 

[Dispatcher308]

Ah, OK - I read it differently, particularly with the mention / use of “propaganda” preceeding. I apologize. Still I’d rather see a positive activation with visual, aural or other confirmation rather than automatic activation based on a mechanical system.

MSP radio's when you activated the Mobile repeater, made a tone come across the VHF High side, so you knew when it was engaged, on the Motorola Radio's now, when you engage those via the radio they make an acknowledgement tone and the radio flashes VRS on, on the Anne Arundel County Command bus (MCCU1) it is set up this same way as we do not want to forget about it and leave it on, I think it is the same for all apparatus in the County so they are not intentionally left on

 

[emtLarmy15]

The tone on the MSP repeaters actually served more than just to tell you it was on. It would actually deactivate any other repeater that was already on and within range. The idea behind the pac RT was it was to be activated each time you got out at a scene. Most troopers turned it on at beginning of shift and turned off at end which is fine til you get 3-4 together and all of their repeaters were keying at same time.

 

[maus92]

In the agenda for yesterday's commissioners meeting, there was a status report for the P25 system. Crews are scheduled to be hanging microwave equipment on the Mystic Harbor tower this week, and Harris will finalize equipment installation and bring the site online next week. That's good because they need to start coverage testing while there still is representative foliage on the trees, etc.

There were also some reports of subscriber units not connecting / garbling, but overall sounded like minor incidents.

The DES staff has prepared data and documents for Federal Engineering to begin their analysis, but a "kick off" meeting has yet to be scheduled (so I assume FE hasn't started to delve into their study as of yet.)

 

[rgchristy]

I apologize if this is the wrong thread, but while vacationing in Ocean City, MD today, I noticed this talkgroup pop up as a wildcard on my TRX-1 on the Ocean City, MD P25 system. The talkgroup was 13844. Unfortunately, I'm from PA, so I wasn't sure what I was listening to. There were brief messages and they were in the clear. I wish I could be more help. I've plugged them in and will try to find out more this week.

Take Care,

Rich

 

[emtLarmy15]

That’s a talkgroup from the Worcester P25 System. They are linked together and many talkgroups can be heard in both.

 

[rgchristy]

Thanks, I'll get used to it yet. In Delco, PA we are not trunked.

Great user name, too!

Take Care,

Rich (Retired FF/EMT)