Batboard

This isn't a topic specific to Motorola, but I greatly respect the amount of knowledge contained in this forum. As I understand the current state of radio in America, all new radios are now required to be narrow band compliant. However, you can continue to use older (wide band) radios as long as you do not need to access one of the newer narrow band frequencies. We are also in the process of converting from analog to digital in an effort to gain ever more band width. At the present time, digital format is optional. In 2013, "all" radio transmissions in America must be in digital format (similar to the recent conversion of television to digital format). I realize this will affect the public safety sector. However, will public safety agencies (I would suspect primarily in rural areas) be allowed to continue analog operations as long as they do so on digital equipment? (I hate the idea of having to force a rural volunteer firefighter to carry an expensive digital handheld radio in the pocket of their turnout gear.) I'm also presuming that the amateur radio bands will be allowed to continue with both analog and digital format. However, will the digital conversion also effect bands such as CB, FRS, GMRS, MURS, etc? If so, I can forsee huge amounts of "outdated" radio equipment either flooding into landfills or out of the country. If this is the case, I would also suggest that now is the time to start dumping all of the "old" equipment I currently have in the hopes of at least getting some return on my investment. If "everything" will be going digital, can we expect cost of new digital equipment to come down anytime in the future? Using the comparison to television, there has been at least some improvement in the cost of new televisions. I realize that there are quite a few grant programs out there to offset the cost of upgrading to digital radio equipment. However, these programs do not pertain to quite a few organizations (i.e. volunteer Skywarn operations assisting local public service agencies, state defense forces such as the Texas State Guard, and I would assume organizations such as the Civil Air Patrol and Coast Guard Auxillary). If anyone is aware of grants available to these types of organizations, please let me know. I look forward to any insight regarding these issues that board members wish to provide. Thanks.

Kirk - KD5HNV

WRONG. The 2013 cutover requires all transmissions to be narrowband... digital or analog, doesn't matter.

Salespeople (particularly Moto salespeople) would like you to believe that digital is required, so you'll spend a bunch of money buying digital radios.

Also narrowbanding only applies to 150-170MHz and 421-512MHz channels. Low band and 800MHz is unaffected.

You must be living in a cave or never read the news. I don't know where you got your information from, but you are
dead wrong with most of your comments.

Point 1, the 2013 January deadline applies only to VHF 150 to 174 MHz and UHF 450 to 512 MHz operations to go
narrow band. There has never been any mention of frequencies outside of these segments.

Point 2, there is NO REQUIREMENT to go digital other in the minds of the Motorola sales force. If your analog now,
you can stay analog. As long as your radios can do the 12.5 KHz band width by January of 2013. Don't forget that
you need to modify your license before that date. When your license is modified, that is when you change. that
date may be well before January of 2013.

Point 3, you sort of mentioned that some government agencies will have to change. They all should have changed
by now. However I do know that some like the DEA are still using their old wide band equipment. this is more due
to the funding process for each agency. They are not governed by the FCC. Look for the rest of the government
agencies to migrate to narrow band operation this year or early next year.

Point 4, the ham radio operators under part 97 and all the other users under part 15 and the likes are not being
required to migrate.

Jim

Kirk Higgins wrote:This isn't a topic specific to Motorola, but I greatly respect the amount of knowledge contained in this forum. As I understand the current state of radio in America, all new radios are now required to be narrow band compliant. However, you can continue to use older (wide band) radios as long as you do not need to access one of the newer narrow band frequencies. We are also in the process of converting from analog to digital in an effort to gain ever more band width. At the present time, digital format is optional. In 2013, "all" radio transmissions in America must be in digital format (similar to the recent conversion of television to digital format). I realize this will affect the public safety sector. However, will public safety agencies (I would suspect primarily in rural areas) be allowed to continue analog operations as long as they do so on digital equipment? (I hate the idea of having to force a rural volunteer firefighter to carry an expensive digital handheld radio in the pocket of their turnout gear.) I'm also presuming that the amateur radio bands will be allowed to continue with both analog and digital format. However, will the digital conversion also effect bands such as CB, FRS, GMRS, MURS, etc? If so, I can forsee huge amounts of "outdated" radio equipment either flooding into landfills or out of the country. If this is the case, I would also suggest that now is the time to start dumping all of the "old" equipment I currently have in the hopes of at least getting some return on my investment. If "everything" will be going digital, can we expect cost of new digital equipment to come down anytime in the future? Using the comparison to television, there has been at least some improvement in the cost of new televisions. I realize that there are quite a few grant programs out there to offset the cost of upgrading to digital radio equipment. However, these programs do not pertain to quite a few organizations (i.e. volunteer Skywarn operations assisting local public service agencies, state defense forces such as the Texas State Guard, and I would assume organizations such as the Civil Air Patrol and Coast Guard Auxillary). If anyone is aware of grants available to these types of organizations, please let me know. I look forward to any insight regarding these issues that board members wish to provide. Thanks.

Kirk - KD5HNV

Jim - don't be too hard on the guy. The fact of the matter is, this is a *very common* opinion... that 2013 = P25. Salespeople (Moto and MACom, largely) along with consultants do their best to conflate the narrowband, digital, trunking, and interop solutions - in hopes that people think 700MHz P25 trunking is the *only way* to be legal post-2013, and to make them think that interop will ONLY happen when you have a 700Mhz 7.X system! These guys make a lot more money when you buy a multi-million-dollar trunking system, compared to a couple TKR-series repeaters and a handful of new radios.

The Moto salesdroids are busy trying to do this in my county right now... it sickens me to think that they're slicing the budget and considering layoffs, but are considering $4.5M for a 7.X system (and they fail to listen to Moto quietly whisper that 4.5M doesn't include the two 350-foot towers that would be required to get mobile coverage up to par, much less portable coverage).

</soapbox>

Nope, don't live in a cave, but thanks for asking. I greatly appreciate the responses provided, however several have included generalized comments that have led to my lack of clarity regaring conversion to narrow band and digital transmissions, and hence my original question. For instance, one reply included the statement, "narrowbanding only applies to 150-170MHz and 421-512MHz channels". I had originally asked if MURS, FRS, and GMRS would be affected by narrow band conversion. Since MURS, FRS, and GMRS all fall within 150-179 MHz and 421-512 MHz this statement would imply that they will be affected. However, other comments lead me to believe they will not. Regardless...I have gained most of my impressions from reviewing various regulations here in Texas. For instance, the Texas Statewide Interoperability Channel Plan (available at: http://tsiec.region49.org/MOU+TSICP.pdf). This plan clearly states that all Texas agencies must convert to narrow band operation by midnight on December 31, 2012 (or when their licenses come up for renewal). However, this plan also clearly states that all transmissions must utilize "compliant P25 Phase 2 (CAI) digital modulation" beginning January 1, 2015. This requirement is what led me to believe that a "drop dead date" had already be established for digital conversion. The concept expressed in several responses that there won't be a mandatory conversion to digital seems very naive to me. Given the state of the economy I cannot imagine the FCC won't proceed to all digital communications as soon as possible to optimize the narrow band width environment and generate significant income from the sale of new band width. At any rate, I do appreciate the responses provided, for the most part they have been enlightening.

Kirk - KD5HNV

That's the current date TSIEC is throwing out for mandating P25 use *on the interop channels only*. They can't tell you what to do on your own repeater. That date also isn't set in stone - it's been as early as 2010, and gotten moved back. Clearly, the direction of public safety communications is P25... do you have to buy those radios today - no. If they expect everyone in the state to be 100% P25 by then - well, as they say... "show me the money!" My department is reasonably well funded and we can't afford XTLs and XTSs...

It just gets better.

One of the local FD PIO's was telling me yesterday that Broward County (general Ft Lauderdale area but not the City of Ft Lauderdale) is planning to move everything to APCO Phase II in the next 3 years. I guess the local /\/\ boyz at Plantation have done their best to sell APX. TDMA here we come. What's next?

Marshall

if I had $10.00 each time I heard that here!!!! Glia county AZ. still works PD, SO, FD on analog channels 25/30 There new idea of encryption is smiple 1 ch. inverted speech. for SO's secret ops. 7 years has gone bye, all is the same...just my 2 cents.

Kirk Higgins wrote:Nope, don't live in a cave, but thanks for asking. I greatly appreciate the responses provided, however several have included generalized comments that have led to my lack of clarity regaring conversion to narrow band and digital transmissions, and hence my original question. For instance, one reply included the statement, "narrowbanding only applies to 150-170MHz and 421-512MHz channels". I had originally asked if MURS, FRS, and GMRS would be affected by narrow band conversion. Since MURS, FRS, and GMRS all fall within 150-179 MHz and 421-512 MHz this statement would imply that they will be affected.

This will become a theme in this -- "imply" means nothing with respect to the FCC. If it is not explictly made part of the Rules, it is not in effect. And if the implementation date is still in the future, it's still subject to change. While the services you mention are within 150-179 and 421-512, they are governed by a different rule part. Narrowband refarming applies only to certain frequencies in Part 90.

FCC has no jurisdiction in much of the frequency range mentioned. Federal agencies under NTIA have adopted narrowbanding for 137-144, 148-150.8, their high-VHF spectrum from ~160-174, and UHF 406-450. FCC is trying their best to free some of their spectrum, but to assume that their deadlines are cast in stone would be unwise.

However, other comments lead me to believe they will not. Regardless...I have gained most of my impressions from reviewing various regulations here in Texas. For instance, the Texas Statewide Interoperability Channel Plan (available at: http://tsiec.region49.org/MOU+TSICP.pdf). This plan clearly states that all Texas agencies must convert to narrow band operation by midnight on December 31, 2012 (or when their licenses come up for renewal). However, this plan also clearly states that all transmissions must utilize "compliant P25 Phase 2 (CAI) digital modulation" beginning January 1, 2015. This requirement is what led me to believe that a "drop dead date" had already be established for digital conversion.

Perhaps in the Great State of Texas, but not nationwide. Even then I don't think it is a done deal. There are still too many problems (intelligibility loss in codecs, delays, coverage problems, conflicting standards, etc.) with digital in public safety services for such a mandate to be accepted in the user community. Digital can be made to work well, just as the original FM "narrowband" (5 kHz deviation) was made to work in the 60s. But it's not there yet, particularly outside urban areas.

The concept expressed in several responses that there won't be a mandatory conversion to digital seems very naive to me. Given the state of the economy I cannot imagine the FCC won't proceed to all digital communications as soon as possible to optimize the narrow band width environment and generate significant income from the sale of new band width.

The FCC has many squeaky wheels to grease. It would be height of naivete to assume that the FCC won't do something because you (or even someone who has been studying the FCC for 40 years) can't imagine why the FCC wouldn't do it. They and the lobbyists who pressure them have much more vivid imaginations, apparently. From a policy standpoint, the revenue recovery model is trumped by public safety and homeland security.

Digital (P25 phase 1) is already antique and outdated by current technology standards in commercial wireless. First and second generation systems installed just a few years ago (such as Philly's SZ 4) are being completely replaced. This should show the cast strapped governments the lifespan of these overpriced and underperforming systems, and encourage them to shop around and do research. NYC is one example of use of "legacy analog" that doesn't seem to have such problems with their UHF T-band system, in fact their comm head honchos have indicated to narrowband the NYCPD radio system would cost 150-300 million dollars and would be a huge logistical nightmare (he indicated all their channels stay busy 99 percent of the time) and would compromise public safety. His desire would be to put that money towards working with other vendors to develop much more advanced technology such as LTE on 700MHz for public safety rather than piss it away foolishly on yesterday's technology, replacing perfectly functioning analog systems at such high cost. (In the report I read, he indicated NYCPD's UHF had 98 percent on hip portable coverage throughout the city which is after all, the prime concern for public safety users.)

As others have pointed out, the narrowband mandate on VHF and UHF has been turned into a spin machine by the now cash strapped Schaumberg company and others as well as their paid stooges (consultants) who score to make billions of overselling. Problem is their customers are as broke as their vendors are these days and cannot afford the ASTROnomical cost of these new toys.

I have a question as to how this is going to change. My volunteer fire department has a simplex frequency of 154.415. When the appointed time comes will we be issued a new narrow frequency to use or will be just required to use narrow compliant equipment on the present freq.? And a comment, politcs being politcs when the time comes and great sums of money will be needed for the conversion, there will be a lot of pressure to congress to either fund the new equipemnt (I feel unlikly) or pressure the FCC to push back or suspend the change.

No, you will need to apply for an amendment to the license and have it coordinated. All wideband licenses will be canceled so if you do not take action you may lose your channels