RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
The new repeaters are exactly the same at the older ones, and the older ones are capable of being converted to narrowband with programming, all Motorola and the all are in simulcast mode, we have plotted the differences between one that is wide band and one that is narrowband in over 50 different locations and the signals are, when seen by a mobile unit, weaker from the narrowband radios, the mobiles are all capable of both wide and narrow band service and of the 160 channels in the radios some are narrow band, also at the same time we added 3 new simplex channels on 150 and same result, car to car range is diminished somewhat however we have not measured that at the moment Andy From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Yahoo Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 10:09 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help I’m curious. Were the new repeaters the same model as the old? Were the new repeaters set up as simulcast as well? Jeff From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Seybold Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 6:16 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help Bill one of the losses if a County fire department system which has 6 simulcast repeaters( 150 MHz) operating on wide-band with about 85% coverage of the County, and we put in three new channels (after almost 2 years of coordination and finding the correct channels), we put them up using the same sights and same output (50 watts erp) and using the same antennas—the new 3 channels under talk the existing wide-band systems by at least 30 percent. We are in the process of adding 2 new sites to make up the difference. I am glad that you did not have a problem but this is just one of several which I have had a problem with, and I have become a believer in lost coverage, I have yet to see a system that has not lost coverage, I am glad that you have. Andy
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
On 8/28/2010 8:38 AM, nj902 wrote: Because a mobile radio really has no way to provide a meaningful delivered audio quality indication, coverage acceptance testing of analog systems is usually done by measuring carrier level at [mobile] locations throughout the system's service area and using DAQ equivalence as defined in TSB-88 to determine whether the values measured meet coverage requirements. During these coverage acceptance tests, the system base station carrier is unmodulated, thus the measured values have no relationship to the bandwidth of the system and would be identical for a given base station transmit power - regardless of which mode it is programmed for. Correct. Which is also why measuring DAQ equivalent this way is pretty much useless for anyplace that has substantial terrain (hills and mountains) or even reflective urban structures that aren't in the center of the coverage area (highrise buildings in a suburban area that is some ways away from the transmitter). Most of the audio quality problems that result in unintelligible signals at the edge of the coverage are caused by flutter and multipath, neither of which is detectable by looking at the level of an unmodulated carrier. Matthew Kaufman
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
If you chose to go digital, like P25 then you could also measure BER in your coverage test? This maybe more meaningful. Although many public safety customers will still ask for voice checks as well. On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.atwrote: On 8/28/2010 8:38 AM, nj902 wrote: Because a mobile radio really has no way to provide a meaningful delivered audio quality indication, coverage acceptance testing of analog systems is usually done by measuring carrier level at [mobile] locations throughout the system's service area and using DAQ equivalence as defined in TSB-88 to determine whether the values measured meet coverage requirements. During these coverage acceptance tests, the system base station carrier is unmodulated, thus the measured values have no relationship to the bandwidth of the system and would be identical for a given base station transmit power - regardless of which mode it is programmed for. Correct. Which is also why measuring DAQ equivalent this way is pretty much useless for anyplace that has substantial terrain (hills and mountains) or even reflective urban structures that aren't in the center of the coverage area (highrise buildings in a suburban area that is some ways away from the transmitter). Most of the audio quality problems that result in unintelligible signals at the edge of the coverage are caused by flutter and multipath, neither of which is detectable by looking at the level of an unmodulated carrier. Matthew Kaufman
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
On 8/28/2010 10:13 AM, nj902 wrote: These faded sensitivity targets require significantly greater carrier level to meet a given DAQ value specifically because of the flutter and multipath - which are reasonably well understood and incorporated into a number of predictive algorithms which are used internally by the coverage prediction software. It does a great job of predicting. But you really need to go listen to it. Again, *especially* in areas like where I live. Matthew Kaufman
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
I'm pretty sure that most all gear made for amateur service has not been type-accepted by the FCC for use on Part 90 frequencies, therefore making use of ham gear in business/commercial VHF/UHF bands illegal. If it's going to be used for commercial purposes, plan to buy commercial grade equipment. It might cost more, but you'll get the service and support that a business requires, not to mention commercial products are typically built to a higher standard than amateur gear. -Brian / KF4ZWZ On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 12:11 PM, n5qs ygr...@white-tiger.org wrote: Chuck Please abandon the idea of using D-Star equipment modified for non amateur use. First this is ILLEGAL. 2nd there is no commercial equipment that I am aware of that is compatible without modification. I would suggest using Kenwood Nextedge technology. This is very similar in performance to the D-Star and has a bandwidth of 6.25 KHz on a simplex radio (Mototurbo can not operate at 6.25 KHz without infrastructure) The FCC has already stated that the 6.25 KHz bandwidth is coming they just don't give any date prediction and I would not design a NEW system that did not comply directly with the ability to use this bandwidth. This is probably the most stable technology in todays market that can be set up with off the shelf equipment. I am too far away to help but would be glad to advise any legal way that I can. Roger --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Chuck Kelsey wb2...@... wrote: I doubt that the D-Star amateur equipment (or any amateur equipment) is type-accepted for where you intend to use them. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: rudy_n2wq r_baka...@... To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 1:08 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Seeking emergency system design help Hello, I am looking for some advice or even a systems integrator who can help me design and implement an emergency communication system for my employer, using an off-the-shelf repeater and radios. My current thinking is to use D-Star radios and a D-star repeater, modified to work on non-amateur frequencies. Since the radios will be in Manhattan, the idea is to place the repeater in our Newark, NJ office and use directional antennas for the repeater. We are trying to prepare for the possibility of the entire building being damaged and thus the idea to move the repeater across the river. 73, Rudy N2WQ Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
It was Rudy looking, not Chuck. Chuck indicated that it is not legal. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: n5qs ygr...@white-tiger.org To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 3:11 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help Chuck Please abandon the idea of using D-Star equipment modified for non amateur use. First this is ILLEGAL. 2nd there is no commercial equipment that I am aware of that is compatible without modification. I would suggest using Kenwood Nextedge technology. This is very similar in performance to the D-Star and has a bandwidth of 6.25 KHz on a simplex radio (Mototurbo can not operate at 6.25 KHz without infrastructure) The FCC has already stated that the 6.25 KHz bandwidth is coming they just don't give any date prediction and I would not design a NEW system that did not comply directly with the ability to use this bandwidth. This is probably the most stable technology in todays market that can be set up with off the shelf equipment. I am too far away to help but would be glad to advise any legal way that I can. Roger --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Chuck Kelsey wb2...@... wrote: I doubt that the D-Star amateur equipment (or any amateur equipment) is type-accepted for where you intend to use them. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: rudy_n2wq r_baka...@... To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 1:08 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Seeking emergency system design help Hello, I am looking for some advice or even a systems integrator who can help me design and implement an emergency communication system for my employer, using an off-the-shelf repeater and radios. My current thinking is to use D-Star radios and a D-star repeater, modified to work on non-amateur frequencies. Since the radios will be in Manhattan, the idea is to place the repeater in our Newark, NJ office and use directional antennas for the repeater. We are trying to prepare for the possibility of the entire building being damaged and thus the idea to move the repeater across the river. 73, Rudy N2WQ Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3097 - Release Date: 08/27/10 02:34:00
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
Can you explain what that means? Joe M. n5qs wrote: (Mototurbo can not operate at 6.25 KHz without infrastructure)
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
1) There is NO requirement to go digital 2) There is NO requirement to go 6.25 KHz. Yet. You can safely install an analog 12.5 KHz system and expect many years of use from it. By the time 6.25 has a firm use by date, you'll be looking to replace the current system anyway. Of course, you CAN use something like MotoTRBO or NexEdge f you don't mind paying a bit more. If this is truly an emergency type system, then you need professional design help, not just from this list. Bill KB1MGH From: n5qs ygr...@white-tiger.org To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, August 27, 2010 2:11:49 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help Chuck Please abandon the idea of using D-Star equipment modified for non amateur use. First this is ILLEGAL. 2nd there is no commercial equipment that I am aware of that is compatible without modification. I would suggest using Kenwood Nextedge technology. This is very similar in performance to the D-Star and has a bandwidth of 6.25 KHz on a simplex radio (Mototurbo can not operate at 6.25 KHz without infrastructure) The FCC has already stated that the 6.25 KHz bandwidth is coming they just don't give any date prediction and I would not design a NEW system that did not comply directly with the ability to use this bandwidth. This is probably the most stable technology in todays market that can be set up with off the shelf equipment. I am too far away to help but would be glad to advise any legal way that I can. Roger --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Chuck Kelsey wb2...@... wrote: I doubt that the D-Star amateur equipment (or any amateur equipment) is type-accepted for where you intend to use them. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: rudy_n2wq r_baka...@... To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 1:08 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Seeking emergency system design help Hello, I am looking for some advice or even a systems integrator who can help me design and implement an emergency communication system for my employer, using an off-the-shelf repeater and radios. My current thinking is to use D-Star radios and a D-star repeater, modified to work on non-amateur frequencies. Since the radios will be in Manhattan, the idea is to place the repeater in our Newark, NJ office and use directional antennas for the repeater. We are trying to prepare for the possibility of the entire building being damaged and thus the idea to move the repeater across the river. 73, Rudy N2WQ Yahoo! Groups Links http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
Interesting. A competing dealer is telling everyone they have to be using digital by 2013. Yes, of course it's a lie, but they no doubt make more on digital systems than they do analog. On the larger scope, I can't wait to hear the uproar when/if the FCC tells everyone who just purchased new SNFM equipment that they have to buy new equipment AGAIN. Joe M. Bill Smith wrote: 1) There is NO requirement to go digital 2) There is NO requirement to go 6.25 KHz. Yet. You can safely install an analog 12.5 KHz system and expect many years of use from it. By the time 6.25 has a firm use by date, you'll be looking to replace the current system anyway. Of course, you CAN use something like MotoTRBO or NexEdge f you don't mind paying a bit more. If this is truly an emergency type system, then you need professional design help, not just from this list. Bill KB1MGH *From:* n5qs ygr...@white-tiger.org *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Fri, August 27, 2010 2:11:49 PM *Subject:* [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help Chuck Please abandon the idea of using D-Star equipment modified for non amateur use. First this is ILLEGAL. 2nd there is no commercial equipment that I am aware of that is compatible without modification. I would suggest using Kenwood Nextedge technology. This is very similar in performance to the D-Star and has a bandwidth of 6.25 KHz on a simplex radio (Mototurbo can not operate at 6.25 KHz without infrastructure) The FCC has already stated that the 6.25 KHz bandwidth is coming they just don't give any date prediction and I would not design a NEW system that did not comply directly with the ability to use this bandwidth. This is probably the most stable technology in todays market that can be set up with off the shelf equipment. I am too far away to help but would be glad to advise any legal way that I can. Roger --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Chuck Kelsey wb2...@... wrote: I doubt that the D-Star amateur equipment (or any amateur equipment) is type-accepted for where you intend to use them. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: rudy_n2wq r_baka...@... To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 1:08 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Seeking emergency system design help Hello, I am looking for some advice or even a systems integrator who can help me design and implement an emergency communication system for my employer, using an off-the-shelf repeater and radios. My current thinking is to use D-Star radios and a D-star repeater, modified to work on non-amateur frequencies. Since the radios will be in Manhattan, the idea is to place the repeater in our Newark, NJ office and use directional antennas for the repeater. We are trying to prepare for the possibility of the entire building being damaged and thus the idea to move the repeater across the river. 73, Rudy N2WQ Yahoo! Groups Links repeater-builder-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com mailto:repeater-builder-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
You mean like making all the over-the-air TV stations buy new transmitters to go to DTV only to introduce a proposal to take over-the-air frequencies away to make them available to wireless (cellphone, etc.) Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: MCH m...@nb.net To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 3:53 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help Interesting. A competing dealer is telling everyone they have to be using digital by 2013. Yes, of course it's a lie, but they no doubt make more on digital systems than they do analog. On the larger scope, I can't wait to hear the uproar when/if the FCC tells everyone who just purchased new SNFM equipment that they have to buy new equipment AGAIN. Joe M.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
Yes... 54-88 MHz cellphones would be cool. Back to the big old rubber ducks. LOL. From: Chuck Kelsey wb2...@roadrunner.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, August 27, 2010 3:15:39 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help You mean like making all the over-the-air TV stations buy new transmitters to go to DTV only to introduce a proposal to take over-the-air frequencies away to make them available to wireless (cellphone, etc.) Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: MCH m...@nb.net To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 3:53 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help Interesting. A competing dealer is telling everyone they have to be using digital by 2013. Yes, of course it's a lie, but they no doubt make more on digital systems than they do analog. On the larger scope, I can't wait to hear the uproar when/if the FCC tells everyone who just purchased new SNFM equipment that they have to buy new equipment AGAIN. Joe M. Yahoo! Groups Links http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
The FCC is re-thinking the move to 6.25 KHz based on the fact that narrow band systems (and I have done a few of them) lose about 30% of the existing coverage AND the NEW FCC believes that broadband is what it is all about in the future-no matter that broadband cannot do simplex or any of the other stuff needed for LMR and public safety. And like a few others have said on here-you have to narrowband but are NOT required to move to digital-P25 or anything else, I have just completed several systems which use analog and we have moved them from Wide to Narrow with no problems-EXCEPT the coverage problems I mentioned. Andy W6AMS (and btw there are professional LMR folks and consultants who work with this stuff every day on this list, just because we are hams too does not mean that we are not in the business as well) From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bill Smith Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 12:47 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help 1) There is NO requirement to go digital 2) There is NO requirement to go 6.25 KHz. Yet. You can safely install an analog 12.5 KHz system and expect many years of use from it. By the time 6.25 has a firm use by date, you'll be looking to replace the current system anyway. Of course, you CAN use something like MotoTRBO or NexEdge f you don't mind paying a bit more. If this is truly an emergency type system, then you need professional design help, not just from this list. Bill KB1MGH From: n5qs ygr...@white-tiger.org To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, August 27, 2010 2:11:49 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help Chuck Please abandon the idea of using D-Star equipment modified for non amateur use. First this is ILLEGAL. 2nd there is no commercial equipment that I am aware of that is compatible without modification. I would suggest using Kenwood Nextedge technology. This is very similar in performance to the D-Star and has a bandwidth of 6.25 KHz on a simplex radio (Mototurbo can not operate at 6.25 KHz without infrastructure) The FCC has already stated that the 6.25 KHz bandwidth is coming they just don't give any date prediction and I would not design a NEW system that did not comply directly with the ability to use this bandwidth. This is probably the most stable technology in todays market that can be set up with off the shelf equipment. I am too far away to help but would be glad to advise any legal way that I can. Roger --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Chuck Kelsey wb2...@... wrote: I doubt that the D-Star amateur equipment (or any amateur equipment) is type-accepted for where you intend to use them. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: rudy_n2wq r_baka...@... To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 1:08 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Seeking emergency system design help Hello, I am looking for some advice or even a systems integrator who can help me design and implement an emergency communication system for my employer, using an off-the-shelf repeater and radios. My current thinking is to use D-Star radios and a D-star repeater, modified to work on non-amateur frequencies. Since the radios will be in Manhattan, the idea is to place the repeater in our Newark, NJ office and use directional antennas for the repeater. We are trying to prepare for the possibility of the entire building being damaged and thus the idea to move the repeater across the river. 73, Rudy N2WQ Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
Well no.. they were talking about the UHF spectrum where 95% of the TV moved to. There's very little OTA on low band, a little more on high band. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Bill Smith To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 4:39 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help Yes... 54-88 MHz cellphones would be cool. Back to the big old rubber ducks. LOL. --
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 12:47 -0700, Bill Smith wrote: By the time 6.25 has a firm use by date, you'll be looking to replace the current system anyway LoL. I'm going to throw a joke out here, but by reading the many posts on here I don't think people are throwing away their old gear and replacing it with new technology :) If someone buys gear for analog 12.5kHz then I suspect they expect to be using that gear for 30 years. I have a pile of old stuff I want to put in service. Chris
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
Thing is, the new stuff is pretty much disposable and not meant for the 20 year lifespan of the Motrac or Micor era. Compare a top end radio like an XTL5000, to a simple 4-freq PL Micor. Price tags are pretty close until you factor in inflation. From: MCH m...@nb.net To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, August 27, 2010 2:53:55 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help Interesting. A competing dealer is telling everyone they have to be using digital by 2013. Yes, of course it's a lie, but they no doubt make more on digital systems than they do analog. On the larger scope, I can't wait to hear the uproar when/if the FCC tells everyone who just purchased new SNFM equipment that they have to buy new equipment AGAIN. Joe M.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
Andy, my comment was not directed at the professionals, such as yourself and others I know personally that are on this list. They were based on his stated requirement for a disaster recovery radio system. It's not something to do cheap or without expert guidance. People keep commenting on losing range with narrowband systems. A large UHF LTR system I installed and maintained lost no discernable range switching from 5 KHZ to 2.5 KHz. All else was the same. Same antenna system, same repeaters, same mobiles. They just pushed a button to bring them to the new talkgroups. Bill KB1MGH From: Andrew Seybold aseyb...@andrewseybold.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, August 27, 2010 5:39:21 PM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help The FCC is re-thinking the move to 6.25 KHz based on the fact that narrow band systems (and I have done a few of them) lose about 30% of the existing coverage AND the NEW FCC believes that broadband is what it is all about in the future—no matter that broadband cannot do simplex or any of the other stuff needed for LMR and public safety. And like a few others have said on here—you have to narrowband but are NOT required to move to digital—P25 or anything else, I have just completed several systems which use analog and we have moved them from Wide to Narrow with no problems—EXCEPT the coverage problems I mentioned. Andy W6AMS (and btw there are professional LMR folks and consultants who work with this stuff every day on this list, just because we are hams too does not mean that we are not in the business as well)
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
Bill one of the losses if a County fire department system which has 6 simulcast repeaters( 150 MHz) operating on wide-band with about 85% coverage of the County, and we put in three new channels (after almost 2 years of coordination and finding the correct channels), we put them up using the same sights and same output (50 watts erp) and using the same antennas—the new 3 channels under talk the existing wide-band systems by at least 30 percent. We are in the process of adding 2 new sites to make up the difference. I am glad that you did not have a problem but this is just one of several which I have had a problem with, and I have become a believer in lost coverage, I have yet to see a system that has not lost coverage, I am glad that you have. Andy From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bill Smith Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 5:58 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help Andy, my comment was not directed at the professionals, such as yourself and others I know personally that are on this list. They were based on his stated requirement for a disaster recovery radio system. It's not something to do cheap or without expert guidance. People keep commenting on losing range with narrowband systems. A large UHF LTR system I installed and maintained lost no discernable range switching from 5 KHZ to 2.5 KHz. All else was the same. Same antenna system, same repeaters, same mobiles. They just pushed a button to bring them to the new talkgroups. Bill KB1MGH From: Andrew Seybold aseyb...@andrewseybold.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, August 27, 2010 5:39:21 PM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help The FCC is re-thinking the move to 6.25 KHz based on the fact that narrow band systems (and I have done a few of them) lose about 30% of the existing coverage AND the NEW FCC believes that broadband is what it is all about in the future—no matter that broadband cannot do simplex or any of the other stuff needed for LMR and public safety. And like a few others have said on here—you have to narrowband but are NOT required to move to digital—P25 or anything else, I have just completed several systems which use analog and we have moved them from Wide to Narrow with no problems—EXCEPT the coverage problems I mentioned. Andy W6AMS (and btw there are professional LMR folks and consultants who work with this stuff every day on this list, just because we are hams too does not mean that we are not in the business as well)
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
Andy, we too lost a large area when we went narrow band with our county wide system, for our Fire Departments. The quality of the audio is not what it use to be either. Rod
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
A few years ago I spoke with someone from MA-Com about this and they indicated that most of the time users would experience a loss in coverage. I don't remember why they said most of the time, but there must be variables somewhere. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Andrew Seybold To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 9:16 PM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help Bill one of the losses if a County fire department system which has 6 simulcast repeaters( 150 MHz) operating on wide-band with about 85% coverage of the County, and we put in three new channels (after almost 2 years of coordination and finding the correct channels), we put them up using the same sights and same output (50 watts erp) and using the same antennas—the new 3 channels under talk the existing wide-band systems by at least 30 percent. We are in the process of adding 2 new sites to make up the difference. I am glad that you did not have a problem but this is just one of several which I have had a problem with, and I have become a believer in lost coverage, I have yet to see a system that has not lost coverage, I am glad that you have. Andy
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
This makes no sense. On the same band, with the same power, and with the same modulation type (analog) there is no reason there should be any loss by lowering the deviation and narrowing the receiver. If there was a change, it is not due to making the bandwidth more narrow. Maybe the new equipment is not as 'robust' as the old equipment. (IOW, both were putting out 50W, but the new one has more energy off-frequency). Or, maybe your new equipment's receivers are not as sensitive as the old ones. A good test of apples-to-apples is to see if a repeater's tail is lower in signal strength than the modulated/repeated carrier, as you're comparing the same thing - a signal of lower deviation to one of higher deviation. You should notice no difference whatsoever. Joe M. Andrew Seybold wrote: Bill one of the losses if a County fire department system which has 6 simulcast repeaters( 150 MHz) operating on wide-band with about 85% coverage of the County, and we put in three new channels (after almost 2 years of coordination and finding the correct channels), we put them up using the same sights and same output (50 watts erp) and using the same antennas—the new 3 channels under talk the existing wide-band systems by at least 30 percent. We are in the process of adding 2 new sites to make up the difference. I am glad that you did not have a problem but this is just one of several which I have had a problem with, and I have become a believer in lost coverage, I have yet to see a system that has not lost coverage, I am glad that you have. Andy *From:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Bill Smith *Sent:* Friday, August 27, 2010 5:58 PM *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com *Subject:* Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help Andy, my comment was not directed at the professionals, such as yourself and others I know personally that are on this list. They were based on his stated requirement for a disaster recovery radio system. It's not something to do cheap or without expert guidance. People keep commenting on losing range with narrowband systems. A large UHF LTR system I installed and maintained lost no discernable range switching from 5 KHZ to 2.5 KHz. All else was the same. Same antenna system, same repeaters, same mobiles. They just pushed a button to bring them to the new talkgroups. Bill KB1MGH *From:* Andrew Seybold aseyb...@andrewseybold.com *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Fri, August 27, 2010 5:39:21 PM *Subject:* RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help The FCC is re-thinking the move to 6.25 KHz based on the fact that narrow band systems (and I have done a few of them) lose about 30% of the existing coverage AND the NEW FCC believes that broadband is what it is all about in the future—no matter that broadband cannot do simplex or any of the other stuff needed for LMR and public safety. And like a few others have said on here—you have to narrowband but are NOT required to move to digital—P25 or anything else, I have just completed several systems which use analog and we have moved them from Wide to Narrow with no problems—EXCEPT the coverage problems I mentioned. Andy W6AMS (and btw there are professional LMR folks and consultants who work with this stuff every day on this list, just because we are hams too does not mean that we are not in the business as well)
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
I was just telling someone the other day about how Motorola is not really Motorola anymore. It's still overinflated price-wise, but it does not come with the superior design it once did that warranted the higher cost. Of course, Motorola has some bargain basement models now, too. It's pretty bad when the cost of repair of a portable that is only a couple years old exceeds the replacement cost; Truly disposable radios. Joe M. Bill Smith wrote: Thing is, the new stuff is pretty much disposable and not meant for the 20 year lifespan of the Motrac or Micor era. Compare a top end radio like an XTL5000, to a simple 4-freq PL Micor. Price tags are pretty close until you factor in inflation. *From:* MCH m...@nb.net *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Fri, August 27, 2010 2:53:55 PM *Subject:* Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help Interesting. A competing dealer is telling everyone they have to be using digital by 2013. Yes, of course it's a lie, but they no doubt make more on digital systems than they do analog. On the larger scope, I can't wait to hear the uproar when/if the FCC tells everyone who just purchased new SNFM equipment that they have to buy new equipment AGAIN. Joe M.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
That loss is likely due to the switch to digital which is required for 6.25 kHz bandwidth, and not a function of the bandwidth itself. Joe M. Andrew Seybold wrote: The FCC is re-thinking the move to 6.25 KHz based on the fact that narrow band systems (and I have done a few of them) lose about 30% of the existing coverage AND the NEW FCC believes that broadband is what it is all about in the future—no matter that broadband cannot do simplex or any of the other stuff needed for LMR and public safety. And like a few others have said on here—you have to narrowband but are NOT required to move to digital—P25 or anything else, I have just completed several systems which use analog and we have moved them from Wide to Narrow with no problems—EXCEPT the cover age problems I mentioned. Andy W6AMS (and btw there are professional LMR folks and consultants who work with this stuff every day on this list, just because we are hams too does not mean that we are not in the business as well) *From:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Bill Smith *Sent:* Friday, August 27, 2010 12:47 PM *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com *Subject:* Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help 1) There is NO requirement to go digital 2) There is NO requirement to go 6.25 KHz. Yet. You can safely install an analog 12.5 KHz system and expect many years of use from it. By the time 6.25 has a firm use by date, you'll be looking to replace the current system anyway. Of course, you CAN use something like MotoTRBO or NexEdge f you don't mind paying a bit more. If this is truly an emergency type system, then you need professional design help, not just from this list. Bill KB1MGH *From:* n5qs ygr...@white-tiger.org *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Fri, August 27, 2010 2:11:49 PM *Subject:* [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help Chuck Please abandon the idea of using D-Star equipment modified for non amateur use. First this is ILLEGAL. 2nd there is no commercial equipment that I am aware of that is compatible without modification. brI would suggest using Kenwood Nextedge technology. This is very similar in performance to the D-Star and has a bandwidth of 6.25 KHz on a simplex radio (Mototurbo can not operate at 6.25 KHz without infrastructure) The FCC has already stated that the 6.25 KHz bandwidth is coming they just don't give any date prediction and I would not design a NEW system that did not comply directly with the ability to use this bandwidth. This is probably the most stable technology in todays market that can be set up with off the shelf equipment. I am too far away to help but would be glad to advise any legal way that I can. Roger --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Chuck Kelsey wb2...@... mailto:wb2...@... wrote: I doubt that the D-Star amateur equipment (or any amateur equipment) is type-accepted for where you intend to use them. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: rudy_n2wq r_baka...@... mailto:r_baka...@... To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 1:08 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Seeking emergency system design help Hello, I am looking for some advice or even a systems integrator who can help me design and implement an emergency communication system for my employer, using an off-the-shelf repeater and radios. My current thinking is to use D-Star radios and a D-star repeater, modified to work on non-amateur frequencies. Since the radios will be in Manhattan, the idea is to place the repeater in our Newark, NJ office and use directional a ntennas for the repeater. We are trying to prepare for the possibility of the entire building being damaged and thus the idea to move the repeater across the river. 73, Rudy N2WQ Yahoo! Groups Links repeater-builder-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com mailto:repeater-builder-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: repeater-builder-dig...@yahoogroups.com repeater-builder-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: repeater-builder-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help
I’m curious. Were the new repeaters the same model as the old? Were the new repeaters set up as simulcast as well? Jeff From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Seybold Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 6:16 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Seeking emergency system design help Bill one of the losses if a County fire department system which has 6 simulcast repeaters( 150 MHz) operating on wide-band with about 85% coverage of the County, and we put in three new channels (after almost 2 years of coordination and finding the correct channels), we put them up using the same sights and same output (50 watts erp) and using the same antennas—the new 3 channels under talk the existing wide-band systems by at least 30 percent. We are in the process of adding 2 new sites to make up the difference. I am glad that you did not have a problem but this is just one of several which I have had a problem with, and I have become a believer in lost coverage, I have yet to see a system that has not lost coverage, I am glad that you have. Andy
