national parks and wildlife

[centralcoastscanman]

ok so can you see the P25 profiles being forced upon agencies, say the RFS, and being told to say abandon their PMR stuff?
cheers

I know i'm going to get shot for this but here goes..

If the RFS combined all of their repeater sited onto the NSWGRN then there would be no reason at all why rfs would need to have their own PMR system across the state.

I know its a bit off topic and playing with fire but Dept of Health(at a hospital level) is another example of an agency using pmr where they could move over to NSWGRN in the city areas.

[criten]

If the RFS combined all of their repeater sited onto the NSWGRN then there would be no reason at all why rfs would need to have their own PMR system across the state.

I know its a bit off topic and playing with fire but Dept of Health(at a hospital level) is another example of an agency using pmr where they could move over to NSWGRN in the city areas.

GRN uses Moto SmartZone II which enables multiple repeater sites with telephone & radio backhauls between repeaters. If you're using two repeater sites, you're using two or three times the radio spectrum licensing than a single repeater site. Fact is, backhaul & widespread coverage isn't free, so moving to GRN potentially costs more.

Then theres all the radio equipment to buy.

Not sure why a hospital would go PMR or even GRN today... when there are services like Push to Talk over Cellular. Also becomes illegal to intercept with a radio scanner as intercepting phone calls is a federal crime.

But sure, organizations like the RFS should primarily use the GRN. Just who pays for all the radio equipment required for the move? I hope I don't with my tax dollars because their current system seems to work fine?

[Garry]

what is the locations of the SCA Fire Towers ??

[cartman]

If the RFS combined all of their repeater sited onto the NSWGRN then there would be no reason at all why rfs would need to have their own PMR system across the state.

I have already come to that conclusion and I am non-technical and have no vested interests.
Rather than improve the dead spots, another network gets created which has identical tower locations over much of the footprint

I know its a bit off topic and playing with fire but Dept of Health(at a hospital level) is another example of an agency using pmr where they could move over to NSWGRN in the city areas.

Possibly and they maybe a good case for being encrypted too


Grant

[ivahri]

This is a debate some of us have been having for 20 years!

Forget about Smartzone- it isn't long for this world (at least in NSW), but even so your argument is not correct. Trunking is far more spectrum "efficient" than PMR because you need to consider how much use agencies make of each channel. The NSWFB and RFS PMRs can go quiet for extremely long periods when there aren't fires. Same with ambos. We talk about "duty cycles" to determine how much use they get & most of these run between 10 and 20% duty cycle. Now the beauty of trunking is that it allows a radio channel to be shared- so that in the 80-90% of the time these agencies aren't operating, someone else gets to use it. In periods of peak load, like during fires & storms it allows these agencies to take up more channels than they normally would- again something you can't do in PMR. So no, trunking is MORE spectrum efficient than PMR- and that is why the ACMA strongly encourage trunking and have done so for the last 20 odd years.

I agree with you on backhaul- but I've just implemented a Telstra based RoIP system that gives me 512/2M throughout NSW & that can easily be shared by multiple agencies. We use other agencies microwave bearers & more shared backhaul will happen over time as bandwidth drops in price. That makes backhauling PMR much cheaper.

The only real issues are (1) Coverage and (2) Politics. The RFS & NP&WS have a unique need for coverage in non-urban, mountain goat country. Providing trunking in to these areas, particularly at UHF and off solar powered sites, is hard & extremely expensive. I personally think the argument is overstated & there are many places where the GRN would work far better than poorly engineered PMR systems (though I know both are working on improvements) but then (2) comes in. Both agencies are fiercely independent & extremely political. They don't play well in other kids' sand pits & like to steal other kids toys... They like to jump up & down & stomp their feet to get what they want... even if it means others go without. So they tend to complain about the GRN even if the complaints aren't that factual, and government prefer to leave the kiddies alone...

For all that I am 100% pro-PMR for areas where trunking is not needed. Like having GRN in Lightning Ridge & Bourke- that was a total waste of money that could have been spent better.

PTT over celular... are you kidding? For life threatening comms? No way in the world- do you know how reliable ptt over celular is? I've tried it- total garbage for anything more than non-essential traffic. The key up delays are unpredictable & determined by network traffic. No serious user would go down that road today. But watch for P25 phase II & TETRA in some of those high security applications in the future.

Your GST money has already bought much of this hardware. Did you feel the pain?

Of course these are my views and mine alone & boy will I cop a flogging (but most people I work with know my views already!).

Cheers,


Richard

If the RFS combined all of their repeater sited onto the NSWGRN then there would be no reason at all why rfs would need to have their own PMR system across the state.

I know its a bit off topic and playing with fire but Dept of Health(at a hospital level) is another example of an agency using pmr where they could move over to NSWGRN in the city areas.

GRN uses Moto SmartZone II which enables multiple repeater sites with telephone & radio backhauls between repeaters. If you're using two repeater sites, you're using two or three times the radio spectrum licensing than a single repeater site. Fact is, backhaul & widespread coverage isn't free, so moving to GRN potentially costs more.

Then theres all the radio equipment to buy.

Not sure why a hospital would go PMR or even GRN today... when there are services like Push to Talk over Cellular. Also becomes illegal to intercept with a radio scanner as intercepting phone calls is a federal crime.

But sure, organizations like the RFS should primarily use the GRN. Just who pays for all the radio equipment required for the move? I hope I don't with my tax dollars because their current system seems to work fine?

[centralcoastscanman]

If the RFS combined all of their repeater sited onto the NSWGRN then there would be no reason at all why rfs would need to have their own PMR system across the state.

I have already come to that conclusion and I am non-technical and have no vested interests.
Rather than improve the dead spots, another network gets created which has identical tower locations over much of the footprint

I know its a bit off topic and playing with fire but Dept of Health(at a hospital level) is another example of an agency using pmr where they could move over to NSWGRN in the city areas.

Possibly and they maybe a good case for being encrypted too


Grant

Grant,

I looked at encryption for my work, and cannot be justified as the information that goes across a hospital radio system is not that sensetive.
The access to patient details we as security officers have is Nil, and thats the way I like it.

[centralcoastscanman]

If the RFS combined all of their repeater sited onto the NSWGRN then there would be no reason at all why rfs would need to have their own PMR system across the state.

I know its a bit off topic and playing with fire but Dept of Health(at a hospital level) is another example of an agency using pmr where they could move over to NSWGRN in the city areas.

GRN uses Moto SmartZone II which enables multiple repeater sites with telephone & radio backhauls between repeaters. If you're using two repeater sites, you're using two or three times the radio spectrum licensing than a single repeater site. Fact is, backhaul & widespread coverage isn't free, so moving to GRN potentially costs more.

Then theres all the radio equipment to buy.

Not sure why a hospital would go PMR or even GRN today... when there are services like Push to Talk over Cellular. Also becomes illegal to intercept with a radio scanner as intercepting phone calls is a federal crime.

But sure, organizations like the RFS should primarily use the GRN. Just who pays for all the radio equipment required for the move? I hope I don't with my tax dollars because their current system seems to work fine?

RFS should pay for the transition of all of their repeaters over.

Richard,
If i hadn't already had a member of this forum a couple of months ago ring my work up and put in a formal complaint about comments I made on here i'd gladly elaborate in relation to the Health System.

I understand the basics of smartzone trunking, but the rfs should pay for it out of the radio budget rather than putting up more pmr sites in area where the grn coverage is scratchy.

[criten]

Trunking is far more spectrum "efficient" than PMR because you need to consider how much use agencies make of each channel. The NSWFB and RFS PMRs can go quiet for extremely long periods when there aren't fires.

Duty cycle has little to do with anything when you're talking about installing new repeaters sites. New spectrum licenses will be needed. Factor the new licensing and the backhaul and trunking is not efficient in my area and very likely to be inefficient statewide.

PTT over celular... are you kidding? For life threatening comms? No way in the world- do you know how reliable ptt over celular is?

Yes, I've built PTT systems for clients of mine - hotels, taxi cos, that sort of thing. It improved alot with the widespread adoption of 3G (both the network and handsets). PTT on 2.5G was pretty shocking though. But if its really not working that great... dial a number instead of pressing the PTT key.

I only suggested it because hospitals typically have fantastic mobile coverage.

Your GST money has already bought much of this hardware. Did you feel the pain?

Yes.

Pete

[ivahri]

Pete,

Don't take my word that trunking is more efficient- the body responsible fror spectrum management belies that & I'd suggest they have put more thought in to the issue than you & I. Of course it always comes down to traffic levels, but if you think that it is any more efficient to have a typical country site with Police, Ambos, NSWFB, RFS, and chuck in the odd utility, each with their own frequencies, individual antennas, individual links, all running at 10-20% duty cycle, than having a single 4 channel trunk site... good luck trying to argue that one. It is a plain silly argument that drives people like me buts when I see a tower, such as Mt Budawang near Braidwood, with 5 or 6 link yagis one below the other each going to the same place, all because agencies don't want to work together (let alone trunk). If I had my way I wouldn't ask- I'd put in one 200kHz wide ethernet/4w E& M link using a single yagi & connect each of their bases to it, and then rip down all that surplus metalwork. But no, all those little chiefs want to play turf wars...

Of course new licences will be needed- but many will also be retired. But you miss the number 1 benefit of trunking- dynamic capacity. PMR= 1 conversation= 100% capacity. Trunking= x conversations/y channels. You can't have an operational channel, a strategic channel, an admin channel on a PMR system without massive duplication but trunking allows every agency to have this on a shared basis.

Trunking IS expanding, PMR will reduce in size, and links will be shared more & more. Argue it is wrong till you are blue in the face- but it isn't going to stop it from happening. I love PMR- I've spent 20+ years building PMR systems- but technology moves on & you either keep up or get run over.

And one thing some "techos" forget is to ask the users. I speak to my users & I would say 90% prefer the GRN to PMR because they don't have to change channels & they have multiple talkgroups if they need it.

Cheers,


Richard

[cartman]

Grant,

I looked at encryption for my work, and cannot be justified as the information that goes across a hospital radio system is not that sensetive.
The access to patient details we as security officers have is Nil, and thats the way I like it.

I made that comment based on 2 premises

1. Hospitals like railways are critical infrastructure.
I know in the case of the rail industry decisions have been made on a national level for example as to security issues and communication systems (GSM-R for metro and 3G for national freight)
It makes a lot of sense to me that there be a similar plan for critical infrastructure like hospitals, water catchment etc
Digital encryption whether it be P25, TETRA or NXDN/IDAS or any other exotic flavour makes sense in the overall context

2. I seem to recall sometime ago that staff and patient security was a big issue ie attacks on nurses etc. In the case of my local hospital they have an additional problem in that they have moved all the loonies from Callan Park there.

Secure systems for critical infrastructure seems to be the direction things are heading in.
At some point the technical issues (eg wide-area system coverage) will be overcome, so the decision will be rather "should we encrypt" rather than "can we encrypt"

Grant