A central or core controller is not required for P25. P25 is just the protocol. We have installed dozens of P25 repeaters with no core. On the other hand, large systems like statewide ones really have no other options but to have some central controller if it is to have secure access control.
I will Arthur that if a radio system is viewed from a total geographical coverage viewpoint you can do that cheaper in one large system than by hundreds of independent ones. Convincing small departments to replace great to get there may be impossible. On Thu, Nov 5, 2015, 6:35 AM Lewis Bergman <[email protected]> wrote: > If anyone tells you digital radio had better audio quality than analog > they are lying. And another thing, all commercial radio systems regardless > of manufacturers, protocol, etc use the AMBE2+ vocoder so as far as digital > audio goes, they are all going to sound pretty much the same. > > On Wed, Nov 4, 2015, 7:45 PM Jaime Solorza <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I am talking about sound quality...don't like the digitized >> voice...sounds robotic and requires repetition to understand....many are >> changing from Motorola to Harris and ones I mentioned. I prefer the analog >> voice....I have worked on all of the above.....yes a 140.00 dollar Icom is >> not a 450.00 Motorola....but it sounds better to my delicate ears. Wasn't >> kicking a sacred cow >> >> Jaime Solorza >> On Nov 4, 2015 6:36 PM, "Lewis Bergman" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Good to know you base your opinion on fact. >>> There are several reasons Kenwood and ICOM are inferior but most of them >>> don't show up until you have a larger commercial system with lots of users. >>> >>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015, 6:01 PM Jaime Solorza <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >> Sounds crappy....no matter what anyone says. I like the Kenwood and >>>> Icom better >>>> >>>> >>>> Jaime Solorza >>>> On Nov 4, 2015 4:57 PM, "Brian Webster" <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> P25 or Project 25 was a Motorola proprietary technology that was >>>>> developed in the 80’s. They championed it to APCO to become the digital >>>>> standard for public safety radio systems. APCO would not adopt it until >>>>> Motorola agree to license it to other manufacturers. That delayed the >>>>> process a very long time and Motorola went kicking and screaming in to the >>>>> agreements at first. It was not cheap for a manufacturer to go that way >>>>> but >>>>> APCO did not want a single vendor solution. In the rest of the world the >>>>> Tetra standard was adopted but again this are older technologies. Now the >>>>> push is for LTE and Voice over LTE. When the FCC mandated narrowbanding >>>>> for >>>>> analog VHF and UHF radio systems they gave a 15 year window to migrate. >>>>> Even with that much lead time big cities like NYC, Boston, DC and others >>>>> did not make the deadline because it was typically a complete system >>>>> replacement. These big cities got waivers with a plan to migrate, those >>>>> plans were special licenses for the Firstnet spectrum and the plan to >>>>> develop a public safety grade/reliable voice over IP type network to >>>>> become >>>>> their primary dispatch radio system in conjunction with their data >>>>> deployments. That VoLTE development is ongoing. They need a lot more >>>>> reliability than what Nextel and CDMA push to talk cellular solutions >>>>> currently deliver. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Given that VoLTE development and the push for FirstNet systems, many >>>>> folks argue that it’s a waste of money to go P25 at this point. There are >>>>> even some Tetra deployments now in the US. Seems to me a standard that >>>>> follows LTE and will also work in the narrowband spectrum of public safety >>>>> radio systems is more productive. I started my wireless career in public >>>>> safety radio designing and selling Motorola systems. I think they build a >>>>> great product but P25 radios are way too expensive for smaller agencies to >>>>> afford them. With the proliferation of sub $100 FCC approved Chinese >>>>> radios >>>>> out there, it’s real hard to justify these digital systems when one is on >>>>> a >>>>> budget. P25 radios are in the $1500 per radio price range. Small fire, EMS >>>>> and law enforcement agencies have a hard time paying those prices. There >>>>> are benefits to digital systems but in all honesty many users don’t take >>>>> advantage of them. The cost of the central site controllers for the system >>>>> really pushes the price tag up. To add insult to injury almost all federal >>>>> grant programs now state that if there are radios involved, they HAVE to >>>>> be >>>>> P25 compliant. The DOD has mandated all radios be P25 compliant. If Utah >>>>> is >>>>> getting grant money that is probably why they are going P25. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thank You, >>>>> >>>>> Brian Webster >>>>> >>>>> www.wirelessmapping.com >>>>> >>>>> www.Broadband-Mapping.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of * >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 04, 2015 4:56 PM >>>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT 2-way radio systems >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, that is helpful. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *From:* George Skorup <[email protected]> >>>>> >>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 4, 2015 2:50 PM >>>>> >>>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>>> >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT 2-way radio systems >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Illinois has state-wide P25 (owned and operated by Motorola >>>>> Solutions). Interoperability between agencies and all of the other P25 >>>>> stuff is nice, but every little town can't afford it and that's why we >>>>> still have little dispatch centers that represent small communities and >>>>> make use of regular old analog VHF. Plus, a lot of users on the state >>>>> system say the coverage sucks, and that would be Motorola not building >>>>> enough sites. >>>>> >>>>> On 11/4/2015 1:16 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>>>> >>>>> In Utah, there is a very very large proposal to change all the 2-way >>>>> radios for public safety out to a P25 system.� Some of the opponents say >>>>> this is an outdated system.� I had not heard that before.� Looking for >>>>> opinions.� >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>
