Batboard

Saw this on a XTS3K the other day for the first time when the radio was out of range. I also saw the out of range message. Radio has current firmware. Prior to seeing this message it had 7.x/7.x FW.

Pj,

Out of range of what? How do it know?

Regards,

800MHz radio, TRS...sorry

OUT OF RANGE - Radio cannot hear the control channel
NO COMMS - Radio can hear the control channel, but the control channel isnt acknowledging the ISWs from the radio

In other words, NO COMMS typically means the system isnt hearing the radio, but the radio is hearing the system

grem467 wrote:
In other words, NO COMMS typically means the system isnt hearing the radio, but the radio is hearing the system

Yep, you often see that message if the power amp is bad...lots of RX signal, no TX power to answer. But it can be seen in regular use as well.

grem467 wrote:OUT OF RANGE - Radio cannot hear the control channel
NO COMMS - Radio can hear the control channel, but the control channel isnt acknowledging the ISWs from the radio

In other words, NO COMMS typically means the system isnt hearing the radio, but the radio is hearing the system

Also seen NO COMMS appear on a radio thats trying to tx on a site in ASTRO and the site doesnt have any ASTRO bases. (3600 system)

Ok, that makes sense. I assume this was added towards the end of the firmware releases...as I never saw it before in the same poor coverage areas prior to the upgrade. I never noticed it in any docs.

FTR:7.71.06/8.03.05

Pj wrote:Ok, that makes sense. I assume this was added towards the end of the firmware releases...as I never saw it before in the same poor coverage areas prior to the upgrade. I never noticed it in any docs.

FTR:7.71.06/8.03.05

It's called something like "imbalanced coverage indicator" and has been a part of the ASTRO25 Line for a while. It's a good thing to have as it will let you know if you can respond to what you're hearing.

That's interesting, because I've not seen that message yet, and I have had cases where the radio was hearing the control channel but the CC was not responding to the radio (I had a bug in the control channel state machine code that prevented it from responding to the radio.).

But yes, it is possible in both Smartnet and APCO-25 for a control channel to exist, and even accept the radio's registration, but be signaling that voice channels are not supported on that system. I would expect a "NO COMMS" message in that condition as well.

I'll have to try that out sometime with the APX radios we have - they have pretty much the latest software from Motorola (as we get updates as soon as the Motorola engineers have something stable, and even sometimes before it is stable :0 )

Wowbagger wrote:(as we get updates as soon as the Motorola engineers have something stable . . . )

At that rate, your mailman doesn't work very hard.

RKG wrote:

Wowbagger wrote:(as we get updates as soon as the Motorola engineers have something stable . . . )

At that rate, your mailman doesn't work very hard.

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

So, that lets me out.

Besides, you left out the rest of the quote....

Wowbagger wrote:

RKG wrote:

Wowbagger wrote:(as we get updates as soon as the Motorola engineers have something stable . . . )

At that rate, your mailman doesn't work very hard.

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

So, that lets me out.

Besides, you left out the rest of the quote....

I don't want to get into a serious debate about how software should be and is developed; I got a chuckle out of your observation and the thought of reciprocating.

That said, I do not and did not mean to say that everyone must always be perfect, a standard that I myself cannot live up to. But there is a difference between making honest mistakes and employing what after a while appears to be a deliberate policy of publishing unfinished stuff and conscripting the paying customers to function as your proofreaders and QC staff.