Users may not create topics, posts, or private messages containing or relating to the following material (especially pertaining to Motorola copyrighted software, unless you want Motorola to come along and shut this site down):

  • Listing for sale or trade of, or links to sites offering for sale or trade of, or giving away, Radio
    Service Software (RSS) or Customer Programming Software (CPS)
  • Profanity, pornography, defamation, or slanderous remarks directed towards any individual or entity
  • Commercial advertising (except in the Batboard Vendors forum, as approved by the Admin/Mod Staff)
  • Any other items which may be deemed as offensive

If any topics, posts, or private messages containing or relating to the aforementioned material are brought to the attention of the Admin/Mod Staff, they will be deleted.

Additional FAQ items appear here in Forum Rules. Please review them for posting guidelines and further clarification.

900mhz Amateur Smartnet

This forum has been created to foster the discussion on future and cutting edge technology. This discussion is not limited or restricted to Motorola. Examples of allowed discussion are open source hardware (GNU Radio for example) and software (Open source P25, Asterisk, ROIP, etc). Discussion is also permitted where older technology could be applied to areas where it had previously not been used (Example: Trunking on amateur radio).

Moderator: Queue Moderator

User avatar
NSPD
Posts: 1587
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2002 4:52 pm
What radios do you own?: Motorola FR50!

900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby NSPD » Mon Nov 09, 2009 7:15 pm

I'm just throwing this idea out there... please read my full post before jumping to any conclusions.

The purpose of this is not to control a system, keep people out, or try to be elite. It is to advance the hobby of ham radio by experimenting with something relatively new just for the sake of doing it, so please don't chime in with "we don't need that on ham radio".

That being said.. if someone were to get a hold of a complete 900mhz Smartnet site with 5 150-watt repeaters and a Smartnet controller, and have space on top of a skyscraper to put it on, what would need to be done to make this legal on the 33cm band?

Would it be possible to assign Talkgroups to activate link radios to other distant conventional repeaters?

How does one remotely control user-access to add User ID's and Talkgroups to the system?

I know these are very general questions, but I am just trying to get a feel of what this would take.

Thanks for any input!

Jake

User avatar
alex
Administrator
Posts: 5697
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby alex » Mon Nov 09, 2009 9:14 pm

Very cool idea.

The one problem you may bump into is the channel assignments....

For example, you can punch in whatever frequencies you want for the control channels. Once that control channel is found, it uses channel numbers to point the radio to a frequency to pass the voice traffic. If that channel can not be assigned to the ham band (and the portable your using work in the channel assigned) you may not be able to make this work.

I don't know who out there could or could not confirm this, but in theory, this might be your only stumbling block.

-Alex
The Radio Information Board: http://www.radioinfoboard.com
Your source for information on: Harris/Ma-Comm/EFJ/RELM/Kenwood/ICOM/Thales, equipment.

User avatar
xmo
Moderator
Posts: 2542
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby xmo » Mon Nov 09, 2009 9:32 pm

I agree that channel mapping will be the sticking point. The radio firmware is designed for the standard 900 commercial bandplan. That's not to say that there aren't software wizards that could conquer the issue.

The idea of using talkgroups for linking is cool. Talkgroups could also be set up for special interest groups: DX, QCWA, ARES, Skywarn, etc. It has been thought of elsewhere and a lot of naysayers will tell you it can't be legal with a control channel running 24X7 in the ham bands.

I don't know about that but considering the work involved versus the number of potential participating users - you might get a better return on your time to look into trunking & IP connect with UHF Trbo - then maybe cross connect the UHF digital to the 900 repeater(s)

You might be able to create your own "poor-man's" trunking using a group of 900 repeaters, multiple PL's for "talkgroups" and some sort of channel scanning protocol.

User avatar
NSPD
Posts: 1587
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2002 4:52 pm
What radios do you own?: Motorola FR50!

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby NSPD » Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:07 am

I thought about the FCC channel numbering idea shortly after I made this post, so I guess that each subscriber unit would have to have a firmware hex edit to change frequencies to work on the system properly.

I also kicked the idea of 900mhz LTR or Passport around, but most of the 900mhz gear is already set up for Smartnet.

The thing is here, there is enough of a user base between myself and my friends to make the system worthwhile, especially if we could talkgroup-link to other 144 and 440 repeaters, thereby only having to carry one radio.
Jake

SlimBob
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 11:38 am
What radios do you own?: I sold my soul for a Saber.

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby SlimBob » Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:56 pm

I love the idea. I'd like to help you in any way I can except that a) I've never touched SmartNet, and b) I've got too many repeater projects going.

But I am very intrigued by the project. Good luck!!

Let me throw this out as well: FCC Compliance may be an afterthought. It takes a lot to get the FCC out in the amateur neck of the woods these days. Your stumbling blocks will likely be the local repeater coordinator and other area amateurs. If the system is designed the way Motorola used them, with one transmitter running at lower power than the others, you shouldn't have any issues.

As for talkgroups, I don't know how you'd disable selection of them without making the repeater itself braindead.
An armed society is a *polite* society.

User avatar
alex
Administrator
Posts: 5697
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby alex » Tue Nov 10, 2009 7:15 pm

Here's something that may align a bit...

If people are pretty serious about SDR, GNURadio and other stuff, I'll make you a forum to collaborate.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=87882

What would be great is to do a open source p25 spec system using GNU Radio and SDR's to run.... Another thing to think about is that APCO is working on an ISSI spec which allows trunking systems to be interconnected and roaming... just like your cell phone....

-Alex
The Radio Information Board: http://www.radioinfoboard.com
Your source for information on: Harris/Ma-Comm/EFJ/RELM/Kenwood/ICOM/Thales, equipment.

Jonathan KC8RYW
Posts: 1747
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby Jonathan KC8RYW » Tue Nov 10, 2009 8:14 pm

I already have three Zetron LTR controllers. Two Z42 and a Z49. If anyone has a manual for these in PDF I'd appreciate it.

Ham trunking on 900 has been on my back burner for a few years.

The main hold-up is that I have yet to figure out how to get GTX 900 LTR portables and mobiles to actually transmit in the ham band in LTR personalities. Help accepted!
73 DE KC8RYW
Random Motorola Part Number:
SYN1894B - V3m Sprint-branded Battery Cover

User avatar
NSPD
Posts: 1587
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2002 4:52 pm
What radios do you own?: Motorola FR50!

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby NSPD » Sun Nov 15, 2009 4:26 pm

This thought was brought up by someone at a hamfest today..

What if the 5-Channel system was reduced to 4-Channels, and those 4 control channels were entered into all the subscriber radios. Would that (in theory) bypass the FCC channel number issue in the radio firmware?
Jake

User avatar
alex
Administrator
Posts: 5697
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby alex » Sun Nov 15, 2009 5:00 pm

NSPD wrote:This thought was brought up by someone at a hamfest today..

What if the 5-Channel system was reduced to 4-Channels, and those 4 control channels were entered into all the subscriber radios. Would that (in theory) bypass the FCC channel number issue in the radio firmware?


No sadly, this would not help.

The control channels list is there just to give the radio a small set of channels to scan to see if it picks up a carrier. The controller sends out commands like PTT request granted on talkgroup 1A, frequency 3F. The radio then goes - what's 3F. It looks at it's internal chart (based on firmware) and says oh, that's 939.1234. The radio listens then to that channel.

This is why rebanding is such a huge deal with the firmware. The firmware had to be changed in all the 800mhz equipment to allow for a new channel plan. All of a sudden 3F wasn't 939.1234 like above, it was 15mhz lower (or however they did the math.)

This is just an example - it's not 100% on target, but should be good enough for discussion. Yes, I know I used a 939 freq for the 800 rebanding, but you should get the idea.

-Alex
The Radio Information Board: http://www.radioinfoboard.com
Your source for information on: Harris/Ma-Comm/EFJ/RELM/Kenwood/ICOM/Thales, equipment.

User avatar
NSPD
Posts: 1587
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2002 4:52 pm
What radios do you own?: Motorola FR50!

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby NSPD » Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:29 pm

On another note... I just was playing in the MTX9250 CPS (which is modified for ham frequencies), and it would not let me enter any ham frequencies in as control channels. Yet another obstacle to overcome..
Jake

skkeeter
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:48 am

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby skkeeter » Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:02 pm

Alex,

I would like to 2nd your "If people are pretty serious about SDR, GNURadio and other stuff, I'll make you a forum to collaborate."

Topics like:
900MHZ Smartnet, LTR ect
Opensource P25
Open Source Harware based Radio over IP Adpaters
Asterisk and RoIP in general
Open Source D-Star (which has flourished in the past few months) I know this is an evil thing but what has been accomplished is good
Interop
Mobile Technologies in LMR

I understand that Batlabs is primarily a community for Motorola Gear and Gearheads. I would not want to distract from the primary purpose but we have some great expertise on board with some very interesting ideas. You could call it "Next Generation LMR"

Brian

SlimBob
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 11:38 am
What radios do you own?: I sold my soul for a Saber.

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby SlimBob » Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:25 pm

Let's go ahead and make the forum to foster this growth.
An armed society is a *polite* society.

User avatar
alex
Administrator
Posts: 5697
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby alex » Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:46 pm

Cool.

I'll work on that sometime tonight for you guys.

-Alex
The Radio Information Board: http://www.radioinfoboard.com
Your source for information on: Harris/Ma-Comm/EFJ/RELM/Kenwood/ICOM/Thales, equipment.

User avatar
alex
Administrator
Posts: 5697
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby alex » Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:33 pm

............... done!
The Radio Information Board: http://www.radioinfoboard.com
Your source for information on: Harris/Ma-Comm/EFJ/RELM/Kenwood/ICOM/Thales, equipment.

User avatar
NSPD
Posts: 1587
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2002 4:52 pm
What radios do you own?: Motorola FR50!

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby NSPD » Wed Dec 02, 2009 8:13 pm

So.. does anyone know if the UHF Smartnet systems out there use FCC channel numbers for their operations as well, and if so does every UHF frequency between 380-512mhz have a trunking channel number?

I ask because I see that there are many commercial UHF smartnet systems in the 450-500mhz range, and there were many UHF-Low military trunking systems in operation between 400-420mhz.

I'm just wondering if I wanted to put up a 5-channel system using 5 MSF5000's or other repeaters with a smartnet controller on say.. 424.3625, 424.8625, 424.9625, 425.3625, and 425.8625, and make my control channels alternate between two of those frequencies, I could do that, since most of the newer equipment on the used market can do Smartnet and the entire 403-470 or 380-470 band.

Also, i've been wondering how exactly the System ID issue would be handled.. Since it would be an amateur system, I would think a random System ID assignment would be okay, and then manually creating a system key in notepad to program the radios would be the best bet.
Jake

User avatar
motorola_otaku
Posts: 1833
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 7:03 am
What radios do you own?: 2 turntables and a microphone

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby motorola_otaku » Thu Dec 03, 2009 8:01 am

NSPD wrote:So.. does anyone know if the UHF Smartnet systems out there use FCC channel numbers for their operations as well, and if so does every UHF frequency between 380-512mhz have a trunking channel number?

No. This is why OBT systems have a base channel and offset settings.. the system starts at a base frequency and "counts up" from there. So when the controller tells a radio to go to frequency xxxx, the radio counts up that number from its base frequency in steps of 12.5 kHz, 25 kHz, or whatever else the offset is set to.
When exposed to Rapid Fire Growth or Thermal Emergency, two things are lost:
1. Ability to use fine motor skills
2. Presence of mind

User avatar
NSPD
Posts: 1587
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2002 4:52 pm
What radios do you own?: Motorola FR50!

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby NSPD » Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:34 am

Excellent.. so in theory a 425mhz Smartnet system could work and be programmed into both newer MTS/XTS series radios, as well as into some of the older 403-433 Systems Sabers that are floating around..
Jake

User avatar
wavetar
Administrator
Posts: 7317
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby wavetar » Thu Dec 03, 2009 6:31 pm

Some neat ideas in this thread, and the OBT stuff in 400MHz can get up & running with stock stuff without any insurmountable hardware issues. I will say, for the 900MHz SmartNet stuff, it's basically a pipe dream. It's not as simple as "a hex edit" when it comes to firmware. It needs to be extracted, de-complied, re-written, re-compiled & put back in. I'm talking about using existing 900MHz SmartNet radios here. The sky is obviously the limit if one were to create & be able to use software defined radios & repeaters. LTR on 900MHz should be possible with stock repeater controllers & applicable aftermarket boards in field radios.
No trees were harmed in the posting of this message...however an extraordinarily large number of electrons were horribly inconvenienced.

Welcome to the /\/\achine.

User avatar
NSPD
Posts: 1587
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2002 4:52 pm
What radios do you own?: Motorola FR50!

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby NSPD » Thu Dec 03, 2009 6:46 pm

The Smartnet idea on ham has been floating around between my friends and I for a while now, and originally the intention was to do it on 900mhz where commercial equipment was plentiful and cheap. The 400mhz smartnet idea is what I think I am going to shoot for now that I know it will be possible.

We also looked into the LTR trunking idea for both 440mhz and 900mhz, but we decided that going the LTR route would be moving in the opposite direction from what we are trying to do. There are a few P25 repeaters popping up in the area, and most of the radios that we are putting on the air now do both P25 and Smartnet, but none do LTR.
Jake

wazzzzzzzzup
Batboard $upporter
Posts: 751
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 4:00 pm
What radios do you own?: XTS3000/astro spectra/

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby wazzzzzzzzup » Thu Jan 28, 2010 8:22 pm

i too have been interested in the thought of a trunking system for atleast 10 years, as me and my friends were using 800 moto type 1 systems in the early to late 90s and had a blast, we wished there were more hams to share the fun with.

ive read the thread but didnt see where anyone mentioned the following.....
for the control channel there may be an issue with controller transmitting 24/7 that was addressed but the controller would need to ID the owners callsign every 10 min or more often, that would be an interesting challenge, maybe the FCC would allow a callsign in the data format of the system. then you have the issue of the hams being assigned to say 928.4125 giving thier callsigns and next transmission someone else is using that frequency and the system assigns the original referenced people to a new frequency where they have not yet ID'd but dont id because they just ID'd on the previous transmission. under current rules that would not fly with the FCC, BUT......if the FCC would make a set of rules for trunking experimentation they could specify that users of a talkgroup could ID the usual time no matter which of the various trunking frequency's they may be landing on are. maybe the FCC would just require the owner to coordinate the set of frequencys as one system. or maybe the talkgroup IDs could be registered somewhere public that the FCC would approve of. just some ideas, i realize if the FCC made some allowances, it would make the rules side of things ALOT easier.

as for LTR i think this would be a bit easier, because LTR (atleast in motorola radios) doesnt have a FCC code, so you could pick a ham frequency and designate it home channel XX area 0 or 1 but unfortunately none of the really cool motorola radios do LTR such as astro products. the HT1550XLS HT1250LS HT750LS or the mobiles CDM1250LS or CDM1550LS do trunking and ham if you get the 403-470 split.

the P1225LS and M1225LS portables and mobiles do 450-470 but the sensitivity is poor in the ham band if you force them down there.
think about how to ENCOURAGE Motorola learning safely with GRACE.....NOT condemnation.

desperado
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:29 pm
What radios do you own?: Motorola

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby desperado » Sat Apr 10, 2010 5:00 am

Just a thought, but there are many unmanned packet nodes out there that are blasting away with data all the time.
My thought is if you could get the control channel to ID, which it's most likely doing anyway in the data, I don't see how it's a
problem. It's a standard that hardware is readily available for. It's no more propritary than D-Star which has been deemed legal.

I don't see a problem with it. Other than cost.
Keith
CET USMSS
Field Tech
What more can I say

SlimBob
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 11:38 am
What radios do you own?: I sold my soul for a Saber.

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby SlimBob » Sun Apr 11, 2010 10:11 pm

Excellent point, but simple work around: say your callsign after every push of the button unless you're on a "two-channel" (i.e., control-channel + 1 repeater) system. And even then you're not IDing your transmission to the control channel input.

OTOH, you can turn down the control channel transmit power. And if you can hear the control channel, you probably have a good idea that the system is up (no need to kerchunk), and is reachable.
An armed society is a *polite* society.

ka8ypy
Posts: 274
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 4:18 pm

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby ka8ypy » Wed May 26, 2010 11:10 pm

Better still, soft ID's assigned to each radio on the system. Call sign is the sift ID. Short of that MDC ID and a posted list of IDs corrisponding with callsigns?

Just a thought.

Jonathan KC8RYW
Posts: 1747
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby Jonathan KC8RYW » Thu May 27, 2010 10:08 am

Or... use LTR and not have to worry about a 100% duty control channel. 8)

From what I understand from LTR, if the home repeater is sending out a MCW ID, it can still respond to requests, and tell the mobile user to another repeater that's free.

Conversations moving from channel to channel for mobile unit ID purposes is probably not an issue. LTR capable scanners have been commercially available for years for monitoring.
73 DE KC8RYW
Random Motorola Part Number:
SYN1894B - V3m Sprint-branded Battery Cover

123
Posts: 708
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:30 pm
What radios do you own?: MT-500 with scan

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby 123 » Sun Sep 19, 2010 11:31 pm

Hey guys. Good thread. I hope this thread brings out more hams wanting trunking as I too have been wanting trunking on ham for many years.

But so I do not hijack this thread I will start a new thread with my thoughts. Feel free to comment on my thread as well.
Jealousy is the best form of flattery, and flames keep me warm and fuzzy inside :)

Roberto

User avatar
RESCUE161
Batboard $upporter
Posts: 2062
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2002 4:00 pm
What radios do you own?: Too many!

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby RESCUE161 » Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:13 pm

I see the point about the control channel, but what do the commercial system control channels do to ID when they are blasting away 24/7? They don't. They just keep blasting away data 24/7. One of the voice channels spits out a CW ID, but just one of them. So just take a 5 channel commercial system. Out of those 5 channels, only ONE of them IDs and it's not the control channel. What are the other 4 frequencies doing to stay in conformance?

Why is amateur radio different? Commercial radio licensees still must ID on their frequencies, right? What makes them exempt from IDing on each frequency?

There has to be a way that the FCC will recognize that this is a good idea and give hams the go-ahead to do it. I like the idea of IDing every 10 minutes per talkgroup and have those talkgroups listed in the repeater directory. I like xmo's explanation for different talkgroups and the sky is the limit: ARES, DX, WX, Skywarn, traffic, VHF and UHF repeater links, etc.
Scott
KE4FHH
Religion: Kills folks dead!

123
Posts: 708
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:30 pm
What radios do you own?: MT-500 with scan

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby 123 » Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:41 pm

FYI You can program the control channel to transmit CW if you wish.
Jealousy is the best form of flattery, and flames keep me warm and fuzzy inside :)

Roberto

User avatar
RESCUE161
Batboard $upporter
Posts: 2062
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2002 4:00 pm
What radios do you own?: Too many!

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby RESCUE161 » Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:16 pm

123 wrote:FYI You can program the control channel to transmit CW if you wish.


Ah, but what about the other frequencies? Out of all of the commercial trunked systems that I've ever monitored, only one of the voice channels ever ID'd. So I can't understand why the FCC would not allow the same technology of ham as they do on commercial as they both must ID.
Scott

KE4FHH

Religion: Kills folks dead!

123
Posts: 708
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:30 pm
What radios do you own?: MT-500 with scan

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby 123 » Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:27 pm

Yea I agree, the ham band plans need a major overhaul. But the big problem isnt the FCC, a simple petition can fix that.
The FCC doesn't change things on ham radio unless there is a group of people that ask them for change. But most hams don't want change...this is the true stumbling block.

Oh well, just join our commercial network then you can do what you want :)
Jealousy is the best form of flattery, and flames keep me warm and fuzzy inside :)

Roberto

User avatar
MSS-Dave
Posts: 767
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 6:02 pm
What radios do you own?: XTL5K, NX300, PD782, Spark Gap

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby MSS-Dave » Mon Jun 27, 2011 5:25 pm

RESCUE161 wrote:
123 wrote:FYI You can program the control channel to transmit CW if you wish.


Ah, but what about the other frequencies? Out of all of the commercial trunked systems that I've ever monitored, only one of the voice channels ever ID'd. So I can't understand why the FCC would not allow the same technology of ham as they do on commercial as they both must ID.


Because the FCC allows centralized trunked systems to ID on one channel, usually the lowest frequency. You can do the same thing on LTR if all of the channels on the site are associated with the same call sign. Back in the day when the rage was converting old Motorola Community Repeaters to LTR, it wasn't uncommon to have 3-4 repeaters on a site with different callsigns. Then, every controller was programmed to send the call of that station every 15 minutes.

If someone wanted to spend the time and petition the FCC for a STA (Special Temporary Authority) to operate a centralized trunking system on the Amateur 902-928 band to prove concept, that would be cool. 123 is on the right track. Problem with 900 is that hams are secondary users which may throw a big brick at the 24/7 control channel.

I have so much ISM crap on 902 here it is practically useless. I ran a 3 site simulcast (not trunked) system for about a year as a test bed for a commercial project. Build it and they will come? Not in this area.... Hopefully, you guys in other areas can do better and the interference is minimal.

Dave

User avatar
mr.syntrx
Posts: 1587
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 10:09 pm

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby mr.syntrx » Sat Sep 03, 2011 7:58 pm

How about EDACS? Would the infrastructure equipment be easier to configure than an old school Smartnet controller?

123
Posts: 708
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:30 pm
What radios do you own?: MT-500 with scan

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby 123 » Sat Sep 03, 2011 10:43 pm

mr.syntrx wrote:How about EDACS? Would the infrastructure equipment be easier to configure than an old school Smartnet controller?



Its not the easiness of construction that is the problem, but more less the "lack of interest" from the vast majority of the ham community as Dave pointed out. They just rather stay on analog conventional and rag chew for hours about conversations that are endless garbage. They have no real interest to try different things although that is what the hobby is truly about. And before you start saying "hey, now!" I will say that I have been a ham for 18 years, but the ham hobby goes more down the toilet as the years go by {in my opinion of course} Yes I know we are all hams here and are interested in something other then the standard analog conv. repeaters. But assuming that ALL batboard members are hams {which I am sure that is not the case} and WANT things such as Trunking, different Digital modes, etc. we are only 20,000 people compared to the 739,000 total hams in the US. Which is only 37% of the USA ham population. We are the minorities.

Thats why at the same time I think the private commercial frequencies have been flourishing into a new era of hams that want to do more with the hobby but were met with resistance from the majority of the ham community to "explore". All of the disappointed hams that I know personally have moved into the commercial bands and have for the most part abandoned the ham side of the spectrum. I am sure there are plenty more hams out there that are disappointed by the downward spiral of ham radio but they do not know where else to go and continue their hobby. There is hope to continue the radio hobby beyond the ham radio spectrum. PM me if anyone is interested and we can talk about it and get away from clogging up this thread.

Roberto
Jealousy is the best form of flattery, and flames keep me warm and fuzzy inside :)

Roberto

SlimBob
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 11:38 am
What radios do you own?: I sold my soul for a Saber.

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby SlimBob » Sun Sep 04, 2011 6:02 pm

I think you're dead on the money. We're up to another rebanding, and *loads* of equipment is going down the drain. In years past, this would cause a growth in ham radio, as radios are converted, used to make repeaters, etc.

The problem is that to pull off a linked system, such as Smartnet, over a large area, one needs to have several frequencies. We've got that in 900MHz (and cheap gear to boot). But 900MHz is limited to largely being an urban or suburban system -- range of about 30 miles, and close to line of sight at all times.

I find it fascinating that DoD, NASA, IRS/FBI/DEA/USSS all implemented trunking radio networks in the 150-170MHz, 400-420MHz, and 450-470 MHz bands.

A modern system will have to have "something new" to it. And the vast majority of hams are appliance users -- they have been as long as amateur radio magazines have been printed.

18 years as well...
An armed society is a *polite* society.

User avatar
blackwater
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 12:45 pm
What radios do you own?: XTS-5000, APX 7000 8/U

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby blackwater » Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:14 pm

It was mentioned earlier in this thread and I'll bring it up again. What if this could be done with a TRBO capacity or even a Connect Plus system. What would be involved in doing this project? If we take out the muli-sites and say just do a single site. The way I understand TRBO working is it resides on a "idle" channel until someone hits the PTT button, at which point if you aren't on that talkgroup it sends everyone else to a second "idle" channel. With the XRC 9000 you can now officially have a control channel.

Reading this thread has given me a lot of idea's and the more and more I read about TRBO the better I'm liking it.

123
Posts: 708
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:30 pm
What radios do you own?: MT-500 with scan

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby 123 » Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:31 pm

I currently own a P16 digital trunking system and capacity plus trunking system on commercial and just recently sold my P25 trunking system. I have also owned LTR, EDACS, and ProVoice trunking systems. Sometime in the near future maybe I will buy a connect plus system to play with.

My point is it can be done and has been done. Its not the matter of "if" it can be done, its a matter of you need enough people interested in the technology. On ham radio there isn't enough interest. I have a buddy that owned a 900Mhz quantar on ham, it was up for 10 years. Only 2 users in that time span. One of them was me, and the other the owner. So it was taken down and sold due to lack of interest. VHF analog is where most hams want to hang out far as FM is concerned.

On any given week you can listen to the TRBO UHF conv. IP ham system, on average you have 30-60 check ins on the worldwide linked ham net...and only about 950 users worldwide in total. Which isn't very much at all when you think about the millions of hams worldwide.

But back to your question of TRBO capacity plus or connect plus on ham. If you really want to do this: I would use UHF, only because UHF freq allocation is somewhat still open and gets better range then 900MHz. I have a spare capacity plus repeater in my garage you can buy. All you do is get frequ allocation from your coordinator {not really required but recommended} program the repeater to the frequency, get a duplexer, antenna, coax, you know the standard infrastructure equipment. Programming capacity plus repeaters and subscriber units is simple. You will have a instant two channel digital trunking system on one frequency. Simply put {without all the technical jargon} its a digital LTR system with double the capacity on a single frequency. Then down the road when you want to link capacity plus repeaters together I can help you with that to. Just PM me.

The biggest problem you will run into is not setting up the system, but rather getting the coordinators and ham community to accept the technology. Most hams don't like change or things they dont completely understand such as digital and/or trunking.

Roberto
Jealousy is the best form of flattery, and flames keep me warm and fuzzy inside :)

Roberto

desperado
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:29 pm
What radios do you own?: Motorola

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby desperado » Mon Oct 24, 2011 5:21 pm

to answer the question of IDing on commercial VS ham

Trunking systems CW ID on typically the highest numerical channel of the system, none of the others.
In commercial you are IDing the system not the operators. Since the ID will be coming from the same site as all the other channels, it's covered.

With Ham the repeater owner typically has HIS call sign on the repeater, the users may or may not be the system owner and therefore are required to ID.
Ham is more specific than commercial. With a commercial system, any operator must have been granted permission to operate on the system. Usually this permission is granted
when the user hires on with the company and it's up to the license holder to deny access or grant access to their system.

With ham, it's assumed that a repeater is open for amateur use unless otherwise noted by the operator/owner of the ham repeater.
Ham's can't really grant access to their systems individually or amateur radio rights to the non-licensed. Each operator is licensed individually, and is responsible for his own actions with oversight from the repeater owner.

I can see no reason that if a system is on ham that you couldn't request permission to ID the system on the highest numerical channel and they grant that.
I see many technical obsticals to overcome before worrying about the legal IDing of the system.
Keith
CET USMSS
Field Tech
What more can I say

User avatar
mr.syntrx
Posts: 1587
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 10:09 pm

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby mr.syntrx » Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:13 am

If you're going to go with any particular technology for a ham trunking system, I have a feeling Capacity Plus is probably the best bet.

* Single "channel" system gives you two talk paths, the same as a 3-channel SmartNet or similar system. Realistically, that's probably enough. And you get data, to boot. You could build a MOTOTRBO GPS -> APRS gateway pretty easily, if you know someone with access to the Location Services ADK, or who feels like doing a bit of protocol reverse engineering. And then there's AX.25 over UDP over MOTOTRBO...

* Being single channel, there's no confusion about what frequency you're transmitting on.

* You can buy a factory new CP capable repeater relatively cheaply

* There's no system keys etc to worry about - as long as the user's ID is unique, you're cool.

* MOTOTRBO has a relatively decent ham following already

I don't know if a CP repeater will CW ID though.

AEC
No Longer Registered
Posts: 1889
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 7:56 pm

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby AEC » Sun Jul 08, 2012 9:41 pm

If Trbo makes a big hit with readily available gear, I would jump at the chance to get one up and running, and switch over to complete digital.
But since the majority of 'users' are stranded in analog alley, the change is probably going to take a decade or more.
I still suggest an LTR format system, EFJ has older gear available, as well as the logic controller and ID validators that can be daisy chained for more loading.
The radio gear is simple to tune and align, as well as interconnect.
Home repeaters can be set up, sites and channels, combining would not be too much of a problem if you can get more than two systems talking to each other through the data.
Simulcast would have to be used if the systems have coverage overlap, or that overlap area will be heterodyne central and unintelligible, rendering the system somewhat useless.
Since I do not have access to MotoTrbo, I can not comment on what it can or can not do, but I would love to switch my GMRS to digital from analog 12.5K.
I have been narrowband for years, even on MURS I use 12.5K, it sounds better to me.

123
Posts: 708
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:30 pm
What radios do you own?: MT-500 with scan

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby 123 » Sun Jul 08, 2012 9:55 pm

I dumped my Motorola P25 & mototrbo capacity plus trunking systems and switched to Hytera. Hytera cheaper, better built, and packed with standard features that you normally have to pay thousands on the motorola MotoTRBO side to have. We have a private commercial system IP linked across several states. I will admit we have several hams that have defected into our system. Ham radio operators are switching more and more to the commercial side as they realize the added benefits of full encryption and no license required for each individual are just a few perks. We will start switching to Hytera DMR tier III trunking soon. {And no, Motorola is not following that DMR path} No surprise there.

If anyone wants to join our private network PM me.
Last edited by 123 on Sat Jul 14, 2012 12:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Jealousy is the best form of flattery, and flames keep me warm and fuzzy inside :)

Roberto

SlimBob
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 11:38 am
What radios do you own?: I sold my soul for a Saber.

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby SlimBob » Sun Jul 08, 2012 10:14 pm

Encryption? What manner of madness is this?
An armed society is a *polite* society.

123
Posts: 708
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:30 pm
What radios do you own?: MT-500 with scan

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby 123 » Sun Jul 08, 2012 10:43 pm

SlimBob wrote:Encryption? What manner of madness is this?


Note that I said "Commercial" not ham...
Jealousy is the best form of flattery, and flames keep me warm and fuzzy inside :)

Roberto

User avatar
escomm
Queue Moderator
Posts: 5131
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:24 pm

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby escomm » Sat Jul 14, 2012 7:57 am

Did I just read that Hytera is better built than Motorola P25 trunking? You are using commercial grade and public safety grade in the same breath?

ahahahahahahhaha

123
Posts: 708
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:30 pm
What radios do you own?: MT-500 with scan

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby 123 » Sat Jul 14, 2012 12:14 pm

I see where people would be confused by my statement, so I added "MotoTRBO" to clarify. The P25 reference was only to state I sold that too.
Jealousy is the best form of flattery, and flames keep me warm and fuzzy inside :)

Roberto

N4KVE
Posts: 1582
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 10:35 am
What radios do you own?: XTS3000/5000, TRBO, 900MHZ

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby N4KVE » Wed Jul 25, 2012 10:40 am

escomm wrote:Did I just read that Hytera is better built than Motorola P25 trunking? You are using commercial grade and public safety grade in the same breath?

ahahahahahahhaha
It's funny, but I recently got on the bandwagon with Trbo here in South Florida. While 90% of the users talk on Motorola Trbo radios, all the Moto repeaters were recently sold, & replaced with Hytera units. Something about the linking of the repeaters being more friendly for ham radio use than the Moto's. Hey, while I wouldn't lay out the cash for a Hytera radio, should the system owners choose to do so, that's fine by me. I'd be happy if they used Pye, or Canadian Marconi, as long as it worked well. While a repeater costs alot of dough, I'm grateful the owners pay out of pocket to set up a system that covers a good piece of South Florida. So as long as I'm talking on a Moto radio, I don't care what infrastructure is used, as long as it works well. I'm sure the owners thought long & hard before selling their Moto rptrs, & replacing them with Hytera's. But yet every day, these same repeater owners carry a MOTO Trbo XPR radio on their belt. GARY N4KVE

123
Posts: 708
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:30 pm
What radios do you own?: MT-500 with scan

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby 123 » Wed Jul 25, 2012 12:54 pm

Gary, thanks for your post. FYI I know several of those guys down there. The reason they still carry Moto radios is because most of them work for a MSS shop and the moto radios are required to talk on their MSS shop capacity plus system. In other words, they need to keep the radios for their day jobs.
Jealousy is the best form of flattery, and flames keep me warm and fuzzy inside :)

Roberto

User avatar
escomm
Queue Moderator
Posts: 5131
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:24 pm

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby escomm » Wed Jul 25, 2012 11:27 pm

N4KVE wrote:
escomm wrote:Did I just read that Hytera is better built than Motorola P25 trunking? You are using commercial grade and public safety grade in the same breath?

ahahahahahahhaha
It's funny, but I recently got on the bandwagon with Trbo here in South Florida. While 90% of the users talk on Motorola Trbo radios, all the Moto repeaters were recently sold, & replaced with Hytera units. Something about the linking of the repeaters being more friendly for ham radio use than the Moto's. Hey, while I wouldn't lay out the cash for a Hytera radio, should the system owners choose to do so, that's fine by me. I'd be happy if they used Pye, or Canadian Marconi, as long as it worked well. While a repeater costs alot of dough, I'm grateful the owners pay out of pocket to set up a system that covers a good piece of South Florida. So as long as I'm talking on a Moto radio, I don't care what infrastructure is used, as long as it works well. I'm sure the owners thought long & hard before selling their Moto rptrs, & replacing them with Hytera's. But yet every day, these same repeater owners carry a MOTO Trbo XPR radio on their belt. GARY N4KVE

There is no doubt that there are numerous features on the Hytera stations that make them more attractive than the XPR8400s. Cost and build quality come to mind. That said, comparing TRBO to P25 is a silly comparison to say the least. Especially when it comes to multisite systems. For the cost of one GTR8000 you can get 12 or 14 XPR8400 or Hytera machines.

User avatar
mr.syntrx
Posts: 1587
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 10:09 pm

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby mr.syntrx » Mon Aug 06, 2012 4:31 pm

Even at the cost for a Motorola station, you still a hell of a lot of capability for not much money, especially if you compare it to P25 or even older Type II systems.

kalimkhan0900
New User
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2014 4:41 am

Re: 900mhz Amateur Smartnet

Postby kalimkhan0900 » Fri Nov 21, 2014 4:42 am

What would be great is to do a open source p25 spec system using GNU Radio and SDR's to run.... Another thing to think about is that APCO is working on an ISSI spec which allows trunking systems to be interconnected and roaming... just like your cell phone....
Unlock the key of your success by CLO-001 exam and Test King.By using our latest Florida National University study material, you can easily pass Hodges University exam.


Return to “Experimental and Next Generation LMR”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest