New Rockland radio system closer to reality

[res6cue 67]

God willing, this system lives up to all the hype we've heard over the last few years about it. I'm a little skeptical, I have to admit. Hopeful, but skeptical all the same.

Rockland emergency radio plan advances

By SARAH NETTER

THE JOURNAL NEWS

(Original Publication: June 28, 2006)

NEW CITY — Two county Legislature committees approved $30.4 million to upgrade the county's emergency services radio system yesterday, but not without words of caution from Legislator Ilan Schoenberger.

During a joint meeting of the Budget and Finance and Planning and Public Works committees, Schoenberger, D-Wesley Hills, reminded the Legislature that it had asked a year ago for a detailed cost analysis for the project.

"We have never received that detailed breakdown," he said. "We have received a generalized breakdown."

He added that the Legislature has not received resolutions from each town and village board approving their portion of the project.

The towns are expected to pay a collective $5 million, half the cost of radio equipment for their police and fire departments and ambulance corps.

The county has until Sept. 21 to show the Federal Communications Commission that progress has been made toward turning its eight frequencies into a countywide emergency communications system.

It's because of that deadline, Schoenberger said, that the committees would agree to borrow the $30 million. But the Legislature, he said, would not approve the expenditure until those requests were met.

The project now goes for a July 5 vote of the full Legislature.

Rockland County Fire Coordinator Gordon Wren Jr. said Schoenberger's concerns about the town and village board approval were valid, especially considering the project's price tag.

But the county cannot get a detailed cost analysis until it pays engineers to design the system.

"We gave them the numbers that we have," he said.

Wren did not get a chance to address the committees yesterday, but said afterward that he hopes the cost will be less than the estimated $30 million.

Emergency workers have said the county's current radio system is inadequate. In most cases, the fire departments can't speak to the police without going through the county's 44 Control. And while the police can use their radios to speak to the ambulance crews, the fire departments cannot.

New City Ambulance Corps member Matt Tannenbaum, also the Rockland County EMS deputy coordinator, said the committees' approval of the $30 million was "quite possibly the biggest step forward we've had in five years."

Like Wren, Tannenbaum said it was understandable that the Legislature be cautious in approving such a large sum.

If the Legislature agrees to borrow the $30 million next week, the county will award an engineering contract "as fast as legally possible," Wren said, noting that bids have been in for months.

Then the county will need to show the FCC proof of the contract and a timeline for the system's construction before Sept. 21, Wren said.

[RocklandFires 44]

God willing, this system lives up to all the hype we've heard over the last few years about it. I'm a little skeptical, I have to admit. Hopeful, but skeptical all the same. 

←

All that money for a new system, and we will still be dispatched on low band [46.180]. Go figure !

[res6cue 67]

Yeah, I know. That's kind of why I was never really excited about it to begin with. We've been using UHF portables for years now, so aside from being dispatched, we're hardly ever on low band anyway. We always used to joke around about how isolated we were, especially back in beginning when the UHFs were the new trend. When Control would ask "can we switch you to another frequency?" we'd goof around that we should say "yeah sure, put us on channel 99 for all we care, we're on UHF anyway!"

Now, if they can manage to improve the low band coverage with all these new antenna sites they're supposed to be constructing, that will help somewhat. All in all though, I'm really skeptical about the system. I don't really see how you're going to get an entire county's worth of fire, police and EMS on just 8 channels of a trunked system. Or how a 4 watt portable is supposed to be heard from the basement of a house in Hillburn or South Spring Valley or Congers without a radio tower every few miles or so.

I guess we'll find out soon enough though if it's bust or not. I just hope all those millions of dollars worth of portables and mobiles are capable of falling back to conventional operation in case the whole trunking idea doesn't work out.

[exmrvfc 0]

Without knowing the details it sounds a lot like the System Westchester County is in trying to implement. In Westchester, Police are not on UHF but they will have UHF Base stations in their HQ to be to speak with Fire, EMS or the County once the Cuonty wide system is implemented.

[tbendick 27]

Or how a 4 watt portable is supposed to be heard from the basement of a house in Hillburn or South Spring Valley or Congers

It won't be heard.... I don't know much about you system, but I am pretty sure you Tac channels will stay the same.

Your tones would go over lowband to all the pagers and stuff. Then units responding and all the radio traffic going on between control and field units goes over the trunked system.. Once on scene all fireground goes over the tac.. The Tac needs to stay for safety reasons, on simplex you don't need to worrie about repeaters or tower failing..

[ff026 0]

All that money for a new system, and we will still be dispatched on low band [46.180]. Go figure!

yes because in the intial stages of planning the radio system UHF paging was not an option. all of our channels are licensed for YW which in FCC terms means CENTRALIZED TRUNKED RELAY. spectrum is tight in this area and there was none available to get a non trunked paging channel. the trunking system will be HARD PATCHED into the lowband system so units can still be heard responding.

if you look at all of the licenses they are 90 Watts ERP. there are going to be between 10 to 13 sites to cover the county.

the system is designed for 95% "IN STREET ON HIP" coverage. which translates to 4 watt portable on your hip in the street with no Public Safety mic covering 95% of the county.

where is the 5% that is not covered? mostly in Harriman state park.

Now, if they can manage to improve the low band coverage with all these new antenna sites they're supposed to be constructing, that will help somewhat.

Low band is not going to be added or deleted in anyway. the existing base stations for the county are staying where they are. there are 4 Low Band sites in the county. The main transmitter is on Cheesecoat Mountain its a 330 watt lowband base. Mt nebo in Nyack is the "Orangetown remote" it is a 100 watt base.

Pine Grove in sloatsburgh is the "Sloatsburgh Remote" it is a 100 watt base. and the 4th Base station is in back of the FTC it is a 300 wat base station. All paging comes out of cheesecoate no matter what part of the county you are in. but for Dept's who require the orangetown or sloatsburgh remotes the voice message after the intial page is 1st transmitted over the "remote bases" then over cheesecoate.

Without knowing the details it sounds a lot like the System Westchester County is in trying to implement

it is a totally different animal than the westchester county system. it is going to be a P25 simulcast system. the main difference is in the proprietary nature of the westchester county system. Westchester's is a Motorola SMARTZONE system. which means you must by portables, mobiles, control stations and consoles from Motorola.

Rocklands is an open standard Project 25 system. there are about 10 different manufactures who build equipment for P25 standards so you can buy whatever types of mobiles , portables, control stations and consoles you want.

rockland's is also going to be digital all the time on the TRUNKING SYSTEM only. to explain the simulcast aspect: all of the sites in the system TRANSMIT at once. that means however many sites we have all of them transmit at once. ite greatly improves the coverage footprint.

the easiest way to remember is: portables and mobiles from westchester WILL NOT work on the rockland system. Portables and Mobiles from rockland WILL work on the westchester system.

Now about INTEROPABLITY: there are a group fo frequencies the FCC has put aside that can be licensed by region called the V-TAC's and U-TAC's. there are already being explored by rockland to set up intercounty communications.

It won't be heard.... I don't know much about you system, but I am pretty sure you Tac channels will stay the same

that is exactlly how it is going to happen fireground communications will remain ANALOG SIMPLEX.

Edited June 29, 2006 by ff026

[res6cue 67]

the easiest way to remember is:  portables and mobiles from westchester WILL NOT work on the rockland system.  Portables and Mobiles from rockland WILL work on the westchester system.

Wait...I think you got that backwards. If Westchester's system is proprietary Motorola requiring Motorola equipment specifically designed and programmed to work on the SmartZone system, then how could Rockland's P25 open standard non-Motorola radios possibly work on their system? I can understand Westchester's Motorola equipment being able to work on our open standard system, but how can the opposite be true?

It won't be heard.... I don't know much about you system, but I am pretty sure you Tac channels will stay the same.

Your tones would go over lowband to all the pagers and stuff. Then units responding and all the radio traffic going on between control and field units goes over the trunked system.. Once on scene all fireground goes over the tac.. The Tac needs to stay for safety reasons, on simplex you don't need to worrie about repeaters or tower failing.

that is exactlly how it is going to happen fireground communications will remain ANALOG SIMPLEX.

I wasn't actually referring to simplex fireground operations, I was referring to the trunked UHF portables themselves. I'm completely aware of how Rockland's new system is going to be designed and laid out. Forget fire for a minute, I'm talking about EMS or PD inside a house trying to reach their dispatcher over the trunked system. Sure, standing in the middle of Main Street should be no problem, or transmitting on a mobile, but how is this going to translate in the real world using a 4 watt portable on UHF in an area that is still very low band and VHF friendly as far as the terrain and foliage is concerned?

the system is designed for 95% "IN STREET ON HIP" coverage. which translates to 4 watt portable on your hip in the street with no Public Safety mic covering 95% of the county.

This is exactly what I mean. 95% coverage while standing in the middle of the street and having no speaker mic on the radio is just too unrealistic a scenario. You can usually just as easily use your mobile if that is the situation. We all know the moments you need to get a message out the most are when you ARE inside a house, and we all know that the vast majority of radios have speaker mics attached to them.

Again, it all sounds so wonderful on paper, but how will it truly perform in the real world? That has obviously yet to be determined, hence my skepticism.

Low band is not going to be added or deleted in anyway. the existing base stations for the county are staying where they are. there are 4 Low Band sites in the county. The main transmitter is on Cheesecoat Mountain its a 330 watt lowband base. Mt nebo in Nyack is the "Orangetown remote" it is a 100 watt base.

Pine Grove in sloatsburgh is the "Sloatsburgh Remote" it is a 100 watt base. and the 4th Base station is in back of the FTC it is a 300 wat base station. All paging comes out of cheesecoate no matter what part of the county you are in. but for Dept's who require the orangetown or sloatsburgh remotes the voice message after the intial page is 1st transmitted over the "remote bases" then over cheesecoate.

Yeah, I'm totally aware of how it works now, but that still doesn't address the issue of dead spots in the county as far as the pager reception goes. What I would like to see is the low band system expanded as well. There is no reason there can't be more low band transmitter sites throughout the county to increase reception. I'm sure the Centracom Gold Elite consoles Control is now using can be programmed so the correct and closest transmit tower is automatically selected based on the fire dept being dispatched. Something similar to cell phone technology, where it polls what site the strongest signal is received on. As it stands now, the dispatcher has to make that decision manually based on where the call is or who is calling into Control. Not very efficient.

Edited June 29, 2006 by res6cue

[ff026 0]

Wait...I think you got that backwards. If Westchester's system is proprietary Motorola requiring Motorola equipment specifically designed and programmed to work on the SmartZone system, then how could Rockland's P25 open standard non-Motorola radios possibly work on their system? I can understand Westchester's Motorola equipment being able to work on our open standard system, but how can the opposite be true?

no westchesters system is a project 16 trunking system 3600 Baud control channel rocklands is gong to be 9600 baud control channel. rockland's radio's can be flashed for both P25 trunking and 3600 baud trunking. westchester's can not they are not specing P25 portables their portables and mobiles are ANOLOG only our equipment wil be both analog and digital.

I wasn't actually referring to simplex fireground operations, I was referring to the trunked UHF portables themselves. I'm completely aware of how Rockland's new system is going to be designed and laid out. Forget fire for a minute, I'm talking about EMS or PD inside a house trying to reach their dispatcher over the trunked system. Sure, standing in the middle of Main Street should be no problem, or transmitting on a mobile, but how is this going to translate in the real world using a 4 watt portable on UHF in an area that is still very low band and VHF friendly as far as the terrain and foliage is concerned?

you are forgetting about the charecteristics of the Upper UHF band. it penetrates concrete and steele better than VHF. foliage is not as much of a problem as it is with low band and VHF. there are also going to be more receiver sites throughout the county then there presently are. all of the receive sites are going to be tied into voting comparator's.

This is exactly what I mean. 95% coverage while standing in the middle of the street and having no speaker mic on the radio is just too unrealistic a scenario. You can usually just as easily use your mobile if that is the situation. We all know the moments you need to get a message out the most are when you ARE inside a house, and we all know that the vast majority of radios have speaker mics attached to them.

Again, it all sounds so wonderful on paper, but how will it truly perform in the real world? That has obviously yet to be determined, hence my skepticism.

you misunderstand the speaker mic part. a public safety speaker mic is a speaker mic that has an antenna on it. i am stating that we are getting a system that will work with a conventional speaker mic(no antenna) with the radio on your hip. as i type this i refer back to my coverage maps. for a building with 6dB building penetration loss(typical house in rockland) the inbound transmission to the system is about 93%. no we do not approach those levels today in this county.

I'm sure the Centracom Gold Elite consoles Control is now using can be programmed so the correct and closest transmit tower is automatically selected based on the fire dept being dispatched. Something similar to cell phone technology, where it polls what site the strongest signal is received on. As it stands now, the dispatcher has to make that decision manually based on where the call is or who is calling into Control. Not very efficient.

no they can not you need a voting comparator for that purpose. That type of system is called Transmitter steered voting. Low band is going to strictly for paging.

There is no reason there can't be more low band transmitter sites throughout the county to increase reception.

well yes there is 1. it is expensive and not cost effective you need base stations antenna's tie lines or microwave. 2. you can not buy a 100 watt or 330 watt micor base station anymore. No major manufacture builds high power low band base station equipment that can handle the intermod generated at modern communications sites.

and by the way the county legislators voted unaminously to fund the system.

Edited July 6, 2006 by ff026