Philly Upgrading to P25

[PhillyPhoto]

Looks like Philly will be dumping at least $30M into upgrading from SmartZone to P25. I wouldn't have an issue with this, but they are crying that the city will have a $1B deficit over the next 5 years, and are closing fire companies to save $10M/yr. I know Moto is no longer supporting SZ 3.X, but what is a general cost/benefit for this upgrade? The thing that surprised me the most is the $2M per year for service on the system.

http://www.hallwatch.org/councilnotices ... cument_src

Pricing below:

Total Subscriber Equipment Costs with Discounts & Credits: $ 9,413,443.60
Total Fixed Network Equipment & Upgrade Services Costs: $ 25,078,999.40
Total Equipment and Services with Addl. Programs & Discounts $ 34,492,443.00

[MTS2000des]

what a ripoff. So they got how many months for their SZ 3.xx system they just bought less than 7 years ago? 7 years is all you get for your money from ma M these days?

we are still using a Smartnet II simulcast system originally installed in 1990. It works just fine and has less than 30 minutes of downtime in the last 5 years. If all you get is 7 years out of a 30 million dollar investment and 2 million a year in maintenance, it's time to shop around with another vendor IMO.

[Tom in D.C.]

It's called "salesmanship" and it can be used for bad as well as good purposes.
"Don't you want the very latest in communications?"
"Look at what everyone, and I mean everyone, is using!"
"You certainly don't want to be left behind, do you?" (Question: Behind what?)

There ought to be a law, but there isn't.

[MTS2000des]

yeah, same deal here. MARTA bought a SZ 4.xx mixed mode system back in 2005, they spent an ABSURD amount of money on it, and I guess never asked or bothered to notice that it would be EOL'ed the following year. The logic was so they could "Save money by using analog only radios for non-public safety", so all the rail guys, bus depots and yards use analog flashed XTS5000's whereas PD and admin use digital TG's. they didn't shop around and got RIPPED OFF, and I am sure Motorola will start telling them they need to buy ANOTHER system for ANOTHER 42 million dollars and go Astro 25 OR ELSE....

this is a transit system who already has had to lay people off and will soon start RAISING FARE prices to buy this JUNK. MARTA has their own radio shop, and was on UHF conventional since the system began in the early 1970's. If they would have added a few more channels, and made some badly needed repairs to the Radiax system, they could have stayed on UHF and avoided the Motorola money sucking vacuum cleaner altogether and spent that money on MORE POLICE OFFICERS and a BETTER SALARY, but why would we even THINK of making a wise decision like that?

[wavetar]

To answer one of the original poster's questions, there are many benefits of newer P25 systems over the older 3.x & 4.1 systems.

Some benefits include but are not limited to:

More capacity - older systems were restricted to 64 sites per zone (48 really, if you wanted to have consoles) and a I believe a maximum of 196 sites overall (less if using consoles) in OmniLink systems. Newer 6.x & 7.x can have up to 100 sites and 50 consoles per zone, and up to 7 zones for up to 700 sites.

Less infrastructure - gone are the days of CEBs with all their associated cards and circuit switched workings. Everything is IP based, running through switches & routers.

Easier & better redundancy - every site can be set up with redundant routers, switches & controllers to help ensure full or at least partial functionality can be kept going. Same thing goes for the master site equipment.

Easier remote diagnostics - every piece of equipment including the GTR8000 repeaters can be accessed remotely from the master site for troubleshooting purposes.

Faster system access - IP networks are inherently faster than older circuit switched systems, which allows voice/data requests to occur much faster than in older systems.

Unfortunately, there isn't much of a migration path to go from older to newer, as the technologies are significantly different. Existing Gold Elite consoles can be interfaced to 6.x & 7.x systems through an AEB and MGEGs, so they don't need replacing with MC7500 units immediately, but little else remains.

[xmo]

I try to avoid being critical of someone's upgrade process because the news item about how many dollars are being spent is only a small part of the story. Hopefully the rest of the story includes a thorough evaluation of system alternatives from several vendors and a carefully developed life cycle cost analysis.

Todd points out many advantages of the P25 solution but Motorola does have an alternative to a full system change-out. It's called Smart-X.

The real issue with the older Smartzone platforms is that the master site computational components are the first thing that becomes hard to support. The site controllers are much less of an issue - especially for SZ4.1 systems that use the MTC3600 which is still a current product and will be supported for years to come.

The Smart-X solution retains the MTC3600 site controllers and the 3600 baud control channel format while replacing the master site with the latest 7. version. Smart-X is a sort of protocol translator.

This product is a way to migrate to a supported paltform while retaining the investment already made in site controllers, base stations, and subscriber units - yes even analog ones are supported!

[MTS2000des]

I try to avoid being critical of someone's upgrade process because the news item about how many dollars are being spent is only a small part of the story. Hopefully the rest of the story includes a thorough evaluation of system alternatives from several vendors and a carefully developed life cycle cost analysis.

Todd points out many advantages of the P25 solution but Motorola does have an alternative to a full system change-out. It's called Smart-X.

The real issue with the older Smartzone platforms is that the master site computational components are the first thing that becomes hard to support. The site controllers are much less of an issue - especially for SZ4.1 systems that use the MTC3600 which is still a current product and will be supported for years to come.

The Smart-X solution retains the MTC3600 site controllers and the 3600 baud control channel format while replacing the master site with the latest 7. version. Smart-X is a sort of protocol translator.

This product is a way to migrate to a supported paltform while retaining the investment already made in site controllers, base stations, and subscriber units - yes even analog ones are supported!

Often times though the customer is not made aware of alternatives. As in the case of the MARTA system, had they KNOWN that what they were buying was "old stock" and soon to be no longer supported, they probably would have and should have held out for Astro 25 or gone to another vendor.

The system we use has an MTC3600 and it replaced an older legacy Smartnet I controller in 2002. However the local Motorola "Pinnacle Club" dealer has been shouting "you'd BETTER go DIGITAL or ELSE" for the past 4 years. The city of Atlanta has been conned into Astro 25 when their MTC3600 based Smartnet II system is more than adequate, works well, and now they have run out of money and the digital project is on hold. They are hoping the new administration will make some more funding available but at the end of the day from a functionality standpoint there isn't much that Astro 25 can do for a municipality like Atlanta and Fulton county that their current analog Smartnet systems can't do- other than drain their wallets.


The Philadelphia situation is typical of the problem facing many agencies. A lack of funding yet they are locked into a system that relies on proprietary hardware and software that now seems to "age" from the perspective of support even faster than ever before.

[Sideways]

The site controllers are much less of an issue - especially for SZ4.1 systems that use the MTC3600 which is still a current product and will be supported for years to come.

I'm going to have to disagree. 4.1 is at the end of the line in terms of new releases, and the MTC isn't exactly considered a current product.

[/\/\y 2 cents]

Wow...hope it was not to solve the problems they are talking about here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcBKAxnS2FY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HijUTGJsCkc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqrpAZhk2NI

Certianly P25 wont help.

Or maybe it is what the "salesmanship" of the weasels sold (P25) to fix this problem.

Certianly being digital P25 will only make the problem and audio worse like these guys found out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3y_eVmRbEA

Oh well. Goodbye old 2-way radio companies. Your song and dance is almost over now that everybody has just about been stung by your charlatans.

Well not everybody: Wheres that next $2Bil contract they can trick the yes men (who cant deciper technology jargon and just nod at a name) into springing for?!?!


Steve

[Jim202]

Not to put the fire hose on the sales Motorola force, but just how many public safety trunking systems
have this many sites to worry about? Unless your a statewide trunking system, most agencies would be
hard pressed to get anywhere close to the 64 sites per zone restriction. Next question is how many
agencies exceed or even come close to the console limits? I don't think there are any in service at
this point, but I could be wrong.

Biggest issue that I am hearing on the new 5500 and 7500 control systems is that Motorola doesn't
even make these. It is a third party product not even made in the US. Software glitches and
problem resolution seems to take a long time to even get someone to talk to.

I don't blame agencies in staying with the current systems. Motorola is making sales pitches for
products that they can't even directly support. Sounds like a good money making scheme for
them and a poor choice for the public safety agencies. Guess we will all have to sit back and see
what the next chapter brings.

I am not against going to newer and better products. It's just that if I am spending millions for
a new radio system, I would expect that it can be supported directly and have a fairly short turn
around time on the support. The trend is to move towards IP interconnections. The IP route
has a number of advantages if implemented in the right configuration. It also opens up the field
to have a number of selections of hardware vendors. Unless I am wrong, this year should prove
to be an interesting one in new systems and products hitting the end users. Makes bidding for
a new system more interesting. Your may be starting to see the end of single vendor systems.

Jim

To answer one of the original poster's questions, there are many benefits of newer P25 systems over the older 3.x & 4.1 systems.

Some benefits include but are not limited to:

More capacity - older systems were restricted to 64 sites per zone (48 really, if you wanted to have consoles) and a I believe a maximum of 196 sites overall (less if using consoles) in OmniLink systems. Newer 6.x & 7.x can have up to 100 sites and 50 consoles per zone, and up to 7 zones for up to 700 sites.

Less infrastructure - gone are the days of CEBs with all their associated cards and circuit switched workings. Everything is IP based, running through switches & routers.

Easier & better redundancy - every site can be set up with redundant routers, switches & controllers to help ensure full or at least partial functionality can be kept going. Same thing goes for the master site equipment.

Easier remote diagnostics - every piece of equipment including the GTR8000 repeaters can be accessed remotely from the master site for troubleshooting purposes.

Faster system access - IP networks are inherently faster than older circuit switched systems, which allows voice/data requests to occur much faster than in older systems.

Unfortunately, there isn't much of a migration path to go from older to newer, as the technologies are significantly different. Existing Gold Elite consoles can be interfaced to 6.x & 7.x systems through an AEB and MGEGs, so they don't need replacing with MC7500 units immediately, but little else remains.

[MTS2000des]

Motorola is pricing itself out of many agencies' reach with Astro 25. No matter how much we like it, it is a closed walled garden which flies in the face of what Project 25 was supposed to be about in the first place. This keeps costs artificially high, and these systems seem to be built upon the Microsoft product life cycle. If you are Bill Gates' best customer, you'll be replacing perfectly good, functioning hardware and software every 3 years. Motorola is doing the same thing with trunking systems.

Problem is wallets aren't as fat as they once were- and governments, especially local municipalities, are considering other options from the so-called "offshore" vendors. NXDN can do just about everything Astro25 can, including support for AES-256 bit encryption, ESN validation, and once the gateway feature is supported- voila, instant Astro25 like network at a fraction of the cost, and on VHF and UHF at that (no hassle with rebanding, Nextel interference, etc), a variety of vendors including Kenwood and Icom mean no jacked up prices.

Getting only 6 years of service and support for a 40 million dollar radio system is absurd, and any customer who would go back and pay more money to the same vendor is a sucker and deserves to get what they have coming for not opening up competitive bids for a replacement. Motorola is seriously off their rocker. They aren't king of the hill anymore, they need to get over themselves.

Their stock isn't too far from General Motors, keep this non-sense up, and they will be right there begging for Obama bucks to keep the lights on too.

[wavetar]

Nobody ever limited the P25 capable infrastructure to Motorola...they were just the only traditional radio vendor who saw the future for what it was & poured the R&D into it starting back in the mid 90's. So, I can't see why people now complain that Motorola is still the only source vendor for multi-site P25 infrastructure. Until someone else grabs the initiative & provides a true compatible, lower-priced product, the price will remain high.

ICOM, Kenwood, EF Johnson, TAIT & others do make P25 trunking capable field units, so there's plenty of choice on that end. There are other companies such as EADS who claim to have a true P25 multi-vendor solution, although I'm not aware of any functioning installed systems, other than some simple demos they've provided to show it works in at least a limited fashion. Perhaps I'm wrong on that, if so someone point me to a real-life working system to check out.

I like NXDN, and agree that Kenwood could definitely make some in-roads in system sales with it. Be aware that ICOM currently has no plans to make multi-site systems with NXDN. They are concentrating on lower-tier systems & are leaving the heavier duty engineering to Kenwood. This is what was said during a recent ICOM roadshow in my area, at least. So, you're still stuck with a single vendor for NXDN multi-site infrastructure as well...and it doesn't follow the P25 'standard' to boot. So, one must still be careful & take all things into consideration when looking at a new radio system.

[MTS2000des]

problem is the limited availability of 800MHz systems and subscriber radios, Motorola pushed 800 down our throats for years and while Icom, Kenwood, Tait, etc all make a plethora of VHF and UHF P25 systems, but offerings for 800 are thin. Your choices for 800MHz P25 radios are limited to Motorola, EFJ and MA/Com.
the offerings from MA/Com and EFJ are very limited compared to Motorola. that is the biggest problem, yet Motorola sells Astro 25 as if it is true P25 which it is not. Good luck buying an Icom, Kenwood or Tait Astro 25 portable or mobile.

[/\/\y 2 cents]

P25 is a long dead mode. P54 is the DOJ/APCO's latest way of playing catch-up.

Those who play politics and are afraid of what people think because they want to keep their job and not take heat for purchasing decisions will think P25 is great.

Those who are savvy with tech will reject it for the half-truth that it is. In the end they will ultimately take heat because P25 barely works. In a lab - Ok it talks and SOUNDS LIKE A ROBOT!- but in the field there are many more failures and disppointments than success stories. Many systems are not even usable.

Beats me why they keep trying to put frosting on technological dog poop. All they do is push their faulty agenda.

Viva la wireless broadband! EvDO, LTE, UMTS, these are the REAL STATE OF THE ART RADIO SYSTEMS! Not some crap to come out of the ever stanky LMR world of radio.

Your "radio" or "Walkie Talkie" will be just another program on your handheld computer/RADIO MODEM!

The band wont matter because all that matters is that you are connected! The internet (and language of it) is universally routable.

Simplex will still be great but all other system types in the middle are just dumb wastes of money at this point.

BTW did anyone see the ex-CTO of Motorola jumped ship for Cisco? Writings on the wall.

Steve

[wavetar]

problem is the limited availability of 800MHz systems and subscriber radios, Motorola pushed 800 down our throats for years

Again, nothing stopped others from playing in the 800MHz field. In fact, many did at one point, but decided to go with the 'open' LTR protocol, as opposed to trying to compete with the vastly superior Privacy Plus / SmartNet systems Motorola was putting out. By the time GE decided to try, the market was dominated.

Icom, Kenwood, Tait, etc all make a plethora of VHF and UHF P25 systems, but offerings for 800 are thin.

Not a single one of them makes a P25 trunked system. Most are single site conventional, with TAIT at least claiming to do multi-site conventional, but I don't know of any deployed systems. Probably in Australia, if they exist.

the offerings from MA/Com and EFJ are very limited compared to Motorola.

Which is their shortcoming, not Motorola's.

yet Motorola sells Astro 25 as if it is true P25 which it is not. Good luck buying an Icom, Kenwood or Tait Astro 25 portable or mobile.

Correct, Astro25 is not true P25, however the IP based 6.x & 7.x systems will work with the other manufacturer's P25 trunked field offerings...the Motorolas simply offer features above & beyond the standard, if you want them.

[judoka]

I think Tait have a multi-site conventional P25 in Canada and their website says they are going to put one into Wisconsin soon.
I thought that they also had 800 MHz conventional terminals and repeaters (single and multi-site)

[MTS2000des]

problem is the limited availability of 800MHz systems and subscriber radios, Motorola pushed 800 down our throats for years

Again, nothing stopped others from playing in the 800MHz field. In fact, many did at one point, but decided to go with the 'open' LTR protocol, as opposed to trying to compete with the vastly superior Privacy Plus / SmartNet systems Motorola was putting out. By the time GE decided to try, the market was dominated.

Icom, Kenwood, Tait, etc all make a plethora of VHF and UHF P25 systems, but offerings for 800 are thin.

Not a single one of them makes a P25 trunked system. Most are single site conventional, with TAIT at least claiming to do multi-site conventional, but I don't know of any deployed systems. Probably in Australia, if they exist.

the offerings from MA/Com and EFJ are very limited compared to Motorola.

Which is their shortcoming, not Motorola's.

yet Motorola sells Astro 25 as if it is true P25 which it is not. Good luck buying an Icom, Kenwood or Tait Astro 25 portable or mobile.

Correct, Astro25 is not true P25, however the IP based 6.x & 7.x systems will work with the other manufacturer's P25 trunked field offerings...the Motorolas simply offer features above & beyond the standard, if you want them.

And there is the problem Wavetar, Astro 25 is an expensive option being sold as true P25, but when you scratch the surface it isn't. The bean counters at the city of Atlanta, for instance, could care less about SZOL 6.xx/7.xx, all they know is what Motorola is telling them: your perfectly good working Smartnet II system you paid through the nose for in late 1995 is no longer supported. Your options are "upgrade" to Astro 25 and you'll get the magic interoperability ferry (which was promised with Smartnet II but never happened- another thread could be started about this alone) or you are SOL.

They are then given the ASTROnomical price and told that "it's P25 so it's interoperable, you NEED this NOW or ELSE", then when you start shopping around for lower priced affordable subscriber radios to replace the 2800 or so you have, you are faced with either buying basic, limited feature entry level radios (ala XTS1500) that are much less capable than your existing full-featured radios on your current system (MCS2000 and MTS2000), or paying 3500 bucks a piece for XTS5000's, not counting any Federal money that MAY or MAY NOT be available (most likely NOT if we keep bailing out businesses with Obamabucks). Or go with those "other guys" (EFJ) who the Motorola sales dude screams DANGER WILL ROBINSON! Those 1500 dollar 53SL's are NOT the same radio quality and performance wise and XTS and Motorola is under no obligation to guarantee compatibility with your brand spanking new Astro25 trunking system you just paid us 30million dollars for
Nevermind that the EFJ is officially licensed by Motorola to work on Smartnet analog, digital and Smartzone digital- you are on your own unless you buy Motorola radios. Nope, you have no other choice. And people think Verizon is evil for using a standardized UI? Heck, Motorola has them beat hands down! At least you can buy a Verizon phone from any number of manufacturers, with Motorola, it's either their way or the highway, and you pay what they are asking or piss off.

So what happened to that "P25 interoperability" the sales guy talks about? It's hot air blow in your face. you either buy another closed network that relies upon proprietary hardware, software and support, or continue to rely on aging equipment, that albeit works fine- but will be treated by the proverbial red headed step child. All this while you are closing fire stations and furloughing employees, heck the city of Atlanta is so broke they cannot even afford to replace toner in laser printers and copiers at police precincts, what makes Motorola think we can AFFORD this stuff? We aren't alone, hundreds of cities and counties across the US are feeling this pain right now.

Now you see Motorola essentially saying 6 years is all you expect to get out of a multi-million dollar investment? I don't care how "superior" one claims Astro 25 is, if it only has a lifespan and support of the average PC software or Windows version, it is crap and only fools would waste that money. This type of spending and debt is what is bringing our country to it's knees, maybe that isn't the case in the Great White North, but where I live it is a real problem. In Atlanta, our firehouses are decaying and rampant with rats and roaches. These men and women bust their ass everyday using substandard equipment, very little support from those who's lives they save everyday, and yet they continue to do their job.

I am sick and tired of our guys getting the shaft, from politicians, haters and vendors who all want to take us for a ride. Motorola builds a good mouse trap, but so does Kenwood, Icom, EFJ, Tait, Harris and everyone else these days. There is no reason why we should keep being CONvinced to buy these closed networks that have absurdly high priced components and subscriber radios, then get told 5 years later "it's crap buy the new 2.0 widget". that is just not good business, it will eat you in the end.

General Motors, Chrysler and Ford...when will MOTOROLA be on that list? Their stock is down to less than 5 bucks a share. The writing is on the wall, excuse me for pointing it out.

[wavetar]

Or go with those "other guys" (EFJ) who the Motorola sales dude screams DANGER WILL ROBINSON! Those 1500 dollar 53SL's are NOT the same radio quality and performance wise and XTS and Motorola is under no obligation to guarantee compatibility with your brand spanking new Astro25 trunking system you just paid us 30million dollars for
Nevermind that the EFJ is officially licensed by Motorola to work on Smartnet analog, digital and Smartzone digital- you are on your own unless you buy Motorola radios. .

Not true. You're not on your own...you are simply at the mercy of EFJ's support system. Motorola allowed access to their technologies for the sake of P25, but it is up to each manufacturer to ensure their product's compatibility...not Motorola. If the Motorola portable works fine with the Motorola infrastucture, then if there's a problem with the EFJ portable on the system, the problem obviously must lie with the EFJ portable. Motorola cannot support it...they did not design nor build it. EFJ must fix the issue. Cost of the system is irrelevent.

As far as only supporting a system for 6 years...complete bunk. Our current 10-year old 3.5 SmartZone system is still fully supported, and will continue to be supported through a step-by-step, year-over-year upgrade to the latest P25 infrastucture through the "Smart X" protocol translation platform, spreading cost out over at least the next 5 years and enabling some existing equipment to continue being used even afterwards.

You raise a lot of other points which honestly we could banter back & forth about for days. Suffice it to say in my view, it's not Motorola which is to blame for the economic situation of any city, municipality, county, or State. They are subject to the same capitalist pros & cons as any other company. I don't disagree that it's a shame there isn't yet more choice when it comes to P25 system offerings, just saying it's not a Motorola fault...it's a competitive shortcoming of the others.

[PhillyPhoto]

The upgrade has been approved by a city council committee and will go to the general council in a couple weeks. I still don't know why they're only leasing the system, instead of buying it and getting support for more than 5 years. It's not written in any of these articles, but the committee asked (I believe) the deputy mayor of public safety why it took so long to upgrade, and she said that she brought it up to the council a couple years ago, but they didn't want to do anything about it then.

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/loc ... adios.html

http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_up ... 94502.html

http://www.philly.com/philly/business/t ... ystem.html