Comments: Flat Nested Threaded Embedded Oldest First Newest First Questions About the Lebanon County Radio Infrastructure By mfboltz on Thursday, July 19, 2007 (EST) A couple questions:   1.  You addressed the disparate radio networks across Lebanon County and the inability to communicate between public safety groups.  What interroperability has been built into the M/A COM system that will facilitate communications across these disparate systems today?   2.  I saw no mention of encryption being implemented as part of the radio upgrade.  APCO Project 25 initially chose DES-OFB as the standard, and has now added AES-256.  Is encryption being implemented, protecting the communications of the public safety officials, or is the public listening on their scanners?   3.  APCO Project 25 has two phases.  You are building a Phase 1 compliant system.  Phase two standards are being hashed out by APCO at this time.  One of the originial targets was the reduction of bandwidth from 12.5 Khz to 6.25 Khz.  What will likely happen is the transition to TDMA which will facilitate two conversations within a 12.5 K channel.  What is your plan for incorporating upcomming changes caused by the evolution of APCO standards?   Thank You   MFBoltz Reply to this Comment Reply to MFBoltz By Daniel Kauffman on Friday, July 20, 2007 (EST)     #1   Our new radio system is a trunked system which will be shared by all Police, Fire, Ambulance and ultimately Public Works. We have designed a talk group structure that not only gives each agency their own private talk groups but there are also shared groups such as Common 1,2&3 that will be in every radio for interoperability.  The communications center will also have the ability to “patch” one or more groups together as needed.  We have also provisioned for conventional frequencies to be brought into our system through causeways.  Some of these will remain more or less permanent as needed until everyone migrates to the new radio.   #2   The new system is capable of encryption (DES). Because of the cost it was not implemented for all law enforcement, however there are a number of “tactical radios” on the police side that are encrypted.  Only the law enforcement radios are all digital, the others are analog.  As of today I am not aware of any scanner that has the ability to decode the EDACS Digital signal.  I realize that is subject to change, but currently everyone hears everything on old simplex frequencies so it is a step towards security.   #3   APCO has been trying to force everyone to narrow band spacing (12.5 Khz) for several years.  They have pushed back the mandatory date for switching to narrow band several times. Quite frankly it is an unfunded mandate that many agencies cannot afford to upgrade to.  I do not see the 6.25 Khz change coming anytime soon.  All of the UHF frequencies that we are using are “narrow band (12.5 Khz) licensed and approved by the FCC.  I am not personally aware of any currently available equipment that is capable of the 6.25 Khz spacing  (I am not saying it does not exist!) but our new radios are not.  The new system is P-25 capable but I am not ready to make that jump yet, nor am I in a position to speculate about the transition to TDMA.  I have looked at the P-25 situation currently and with the extra expense and additional security concerns that I have, we are not planning that anytime soon.  We do have an OPEN SKY interface with the State currently that allows us to patch the OPEN SKY Network to our EDACS Network for interoperability with the state.  Lebanon County is the first county in the state to do this.    djk     Reply to this Comment Any updates? By WShowers on Thursday, January 03, 2008 (EST) Again thanks for all the information previously provided!!!   Any new updates / progress on the new radio system?   Thanks! William Showers Reply to this Comment Radio System Update January 2008 By Daniel Kauffman on Monday, January 14, 2008 (EST)     Bill,   My apologies – I started this column in an effort to keep people in the loop so to speak and it just never seems to get to the top of my “to do” list. After negotiating with Comcast, we now have an agreement on their site at Eagles Peak, Millcreek Twp. They have been very accommodating and most of the delay was a result of turnover of personnel.  At any rate we are now in the Comcast site and have had a paging base set up at that location for several weeks.  In preliminary drive testing it appears to have helped significantly.  We still have weak spots on the backside of the mountain and we are looking at an antenna design change to address this.  The additional land mobile radio equipment for this site has been ordered.  We have the support of the commissioners to go forward with both the Comcast site and a site in Annville.  If you recall we initially talked with the college but height requirements caused us to look further.  We met with the Annville Cleona High School and did get a “preliminary” approval to move forward.  Unfortunately, in December of 2007 we learned that the current radio tower they have, will not support our needs.  The site is still an excellent location for us, but their tower would have to be replaced or another one added.   I am waiting for more specific information from M/A-COM on what that replacement might be or look like. Until I have more information, I am in a holding pattern as far as pursuing this option. I cannot approach the school board without having some specific answers but I have no reason to believe that they will not support this effort. The next steps we need to take are to obtain coverage reports from M/A-COM to present to the commissioners so they can be assured the coverage we gain will address our needs. We are in the process of finalizing contracts, which include coverage, an installation timeline and costs. In the interim, due to the delays involved in the Annville site we, are moving forward with an additional paging base to be located (at least temporarily) at the Annville Fire Company. This will address the lack of coverage in that area for paging.  We have plans to change transmitter power and antenna design at the Grantville Tower site and Greenpoint.  Upon the completion of this work, we will do another self-assessment and move forward with addressing other local paging coverage issues as they are identified.  One of the most recent accomplishments was to negotiate an increase in the licensing for the portable radios.  The addition of the additional sites and frequencies has caused us to out grow the original licensing restrictions.  These new radio codes must now be programmed into the current radios in use and subsequently into the remaining un-issued radios. This additional licensing was slow to work out but did not result in any cost to the public.  Communications System Specialties (CSS) is currently programming radios to distribute to the fire, emergency ambulance service and ultimately public works. I expect this radio distribution to begin within a couple weeks.   Daniel Kauffman Reply to this Comment New Radios By WShowers on Monday, January 14, 2008 (EST) I realize you have exceeded previous time constraints for roll out and switch over to this new system and probably don't wish to commit to anything as far as time frame goes.......But I will ask! When do you see us switching to the new system from an operational stand point?   My company (Sta.10, Jonestown) has been using these radio's for the last 6 months or so in a testing capacity and I personally have been quite impressed with them!    Thanks very much for the update!   Sincerely! William showers  Reply to this Comment January 2008 Update Response By Daniel Kauffman on Monday, January 14, 2008 (EST) Bill,   You are right in that I have been burned by time constraints in the past.  We are almost totally restricted at this point, by the roll out by CSS.  You must understand that they have been paid by M/A-COM to complete programming and rollout but they have been burned by the need to re-program many of the radios with the changes incurred during the system rollout.  That, having been said, there are other issues that must be addressed.  One of them is in-building coverage.  While I have every confidence that field coverage will be acceptable, the difference between trunked radio and conventional, in building is night and day, compared to conventional.  It will be up to each company to find the weak spots, report them and if possible we will address them.  The reality of it is, that there very well may be spots (in building) that fire companies have to be aware of, and possibly go conventional – either with a legacy (low band or repeater system) or conventional on the UHF radio (which is built into the system). There will be cases where in building coverage is better and others that in building coverage is questionable.  I fully expect that by the end of 2008 we will be on the new system with all users, with the exception of public works.  The inclusion of Public Works will be a work in progress as some of them are already registered users and others are not.  Thank you in advance for your confidence and support, but please be aware that there will be issues that must be dealt with as we move forward.   DJK Reply to this Comment New Radio By WShowers on Monday, January 14, 2008 (EST) Thanks again! I appreciate you taking time to answer my questions!   William Showers Reply to this Comment

Add Your Comment