The problem with both systems (and is also a problem with Ohio MARCS, which is Motorola Smartnet w/P25 audio, and MI too), is that they were designed and spec'd BY THE GOV'T to provide mobile coverage, not handheld coverage, and they are trying to use it with mostly handhelds. Also it was only designed to serve a few agencies (less capacity), and they are cramming everybody and their brother on it, so it overloads VERY fast. I've seen this time and time again, where an agency goes for a new system, and in order to save a buck, doesn't listen to the engineers, and they wind up with a system that doesn't cover what they want.
Milt wrote: > Chuck, your experience parallels what many users in Pennsylvania have > experienced. The only difference here is that the state continues to throw > money at a dead animal believing that it can be made to stand. The general > opinion here is that in very strong signal conditions (like in the lab) the > system sounds OK. In weak signal locations and the real world the system > can easily fall apart. > Of course we are referring to the Ma/Com "Open Sky" system which is a > proprietary digital system and is NOT P25. > > MIlt > N3LTQ > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Chuck Kelsey" <wb2...@roadrunner.com> > To: <Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com> > Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 1:02 PM > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] (OT) APCO P25 horror stories anyone? > > >> Have you read the engineering reports? >> >> I used one of the radios and wasn't very impressed (actually I was quite >> disappointed). And I was a cheerleader for the system up until then. >> >> Chuck >> >> >>> And M/A-Com is suing the state because they DID meet the original >>> specs/requirements, and the state is just trying to back out of spending >>> the money. >>> Crooked gov't? naaahhh... >>>
